A sucessão de Ban Ki-moon

With eighteen months still to go before a decision is due to be taken, the race to succeed Ban Ki-moon as the next UN Secretary General is well under way with potential candidates and the selection process itself already the subject of intense debate. The appointment comes as the resurfacing of tensions between East and West over Syria and Ukraine has left the world body facing its most difficult challenge in a generation. The spectre of a UN gridlocked by Cold War-style divisions within the Security Council looms unless someone with real diplomatic skill takes the helm. That’s assuming the permanent members can reach consensus on who that might be in the current atmosphere of mutual suspicion and animosity. The risk of the process descending into a cycle of tit-for-tat vetoing is very real. Matters are further complicated by the UN’s rotation policy, formalised in 1997 to ensure that every region of the world gets the chance to have one of their own appointed to the top job. As the only designated region still waiting its turn, it is supposed to be Eastern Europe this time. The problem, of course, is that the region straddles the new geopolitical fault line leaving very few countries deemed even-handed enough to bridge the divide. Candidates from Poland and the Baltic states need not apply as far as Russia is concerned. The same goes for most of the other EU member states with Putin still fuming over sanctions imposed by Brussels. The antagonism cuts both ways. The Serb candidate, former foreign minister Vuk Jeremic, would be vetoed by Washington over his country’s strategic partnership with Russia and its rejectionist stance on Kosovo. Geography isn’t the only consideration. A new and powerful factor in the debate is the growing sense that with the organisation’s seventieth anniversary falling next year it’s high time a woman held the top UN post. As if in Dr Who, the Secretary General keeps regenerating as a man. This is impossible to justify, especially at a time when the status of women has become such a central part of the global agenda through issues like sexual violence, human development and the modern slave trade. As the recent surge of activism in India has shown, the women’s movement across the developed and developing worlds alike is more mobilised and vocal than ever before. Pressure on the UN to reflect this in its choice of Secretary General will only grow. The ideal solution would be for the Security Council to unite behind a woman from Eastern Europe. Perhaps the only country capable of producing such a candidate is Bulgaria, a Nato and EU member state that has nevertheless maintained good relations with Russia. The two names in the frame are Irina Bokova, the serving executive director of Unesco, and Kristalina Georgieva, a former World Bank economist and current European Commissioner. Both are strong contenders, but Georgieva only took up her new post as Commission Vice-President earlier this month and word in Brussels and Paris is that she would not be given leave to stand for the UN job. Educated in both Russia and the United States, and with real executive experience at the UN behind her, Bokova looks much better placed. In the event that the countries of Eastern Europe fail to propose a suitable woman candidate, there will be enormous pressure to cast the net wider and consider women from other parts of the world. After all, the General Assembly resolution that formalised the principle of regional rotation gave equal weight to the need for gender equality. Waiting to see how things develop is a cast of capable women with strong foreign policy credentials. This includes Helen Clark, the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme, Chilean President, Michelle Bachelet, and Columbian Foreign Minister, María Ángela Holguín Cuéllar. As a permanent member of the Security Council with the ability to support or veto any candidate, the UK’s position will be influential. The decision on how to use that influence will fall to whoever ends up Prime Minister next May, yet could be the same whichever party is in power. Labour would prefer to back a woman from Eastern Europe because it believes in European solidarity and gender equality. The Tories would be inclined to do the same because it needs European allies for its proposed renegotiation and has an image problem with women voters. What Ed Miliband would do out of principle, David Cameron would do out of expediency. The most interesting question is what would happen if a woman candidate from Eastern Europe was not forthcoming? The view in London is that the Buggin’s turn principle is the least important consideration. Whether the next Secretary General comes from Eastern Europe will depend entirely on the qualities of the candidates that come forward. The clamour for a woman, however, will be much harder to resist, and rightly so. David Clark is the founder and editor of Shifting Grounds, and served as special adviser to Robin Cook at the Foreign Office from 1997 til 2001 The New Statesman

Líbia: Um país que foi destroçado em 2011

Depuis la chute du régime de Mouammar Kadhafi en octobre 2011, le pays est livré aux milices rivales sans que les autorités de transition parviennent à rétablir l'ordre ni que la communauté internationale se sente très concernée. "Une guerre totale". C’est, selon l’ONU, à quoi la situation en Libye pourrait bientôt ressembler si aucune mesure importante n'est prise. Quatre ans après la chute du régime de Mouammar Kadhafi, le pays est en proie aux violences quotidiennes et aux luttes de pouvoir. Mardi 30 décembre, une voiture piégée a explosé à Toubrouk (dans l'est du pays) devant l'hôtel où siège le Parlement alors que les députés y étaient réunis. Une source médicale à l'hôpital a dit avoir reçu 19 personnes souffrant de légères blessures. Confusion dans le Nord Sur le plan politique, la situation est très confuse. Deux gouvernements et des parlements rivaux se disputent l'autorité sur le pays. Les uns sont proches de la puissante coalition des milices "Fajr Libya" et les autres reconnus par la communauté internationale. C'est en août que "Fajr Libya", formée notamment de milices islamistes, a pris le contrôle de la capitale Tripoli et tente depuis d'étendre son influence. La perte de la capitale a poussé le gouvernement et le Parlement reconnus par la communauté internationale à s'installer à Tobrouk. Après avoir fait main basse sur Tripoli, "Fajr Libya" y a installé un gouvernement parallèle alors que le Congrès général national, l'ex-Parlement dominé par les islamistes, a repris du service sous l'impulsion de cette coalition. Dans ses velléités d'expansion, le groupe avait lancé le 13 décembre un assaut pour prendre le contrôle du terminal d'Al-Sedra défendu farouchement par les forces gouvernementales. Des affrontements sporadiques avaient lieu encore mardi. Sept des 19 réservoirs de pétrole ont été totalement détruits depuis et le "déversement du pétrole en feu menace les 12 autres réservoirs", a précisé un responsable de la compagnie libyenne Al-Waha. Un vivier jihadiste Outre les combats à Sedra, des affrontements meurtriers opposent forces pro-gouvernementales et milices islamistes à Benghazi et Derna. La ville côtière de Derna, épicentre et vivier de cette radicalisation depuis le début des années 2000, est devenue une place forte des jihadistes après la chute de Kadhafi. Plusieurs sources font état du retour massif de combattants à Derna, renforcé par l'afflux récent de jihadistes étrangers. Aujourd’hui, des drapeaux noirs frappés de la chahada (profession de foi) flottent sur des bâtiments officiels. Le 5 octobre, plusieurs groupes armés se sont réunis pour prêter allégeance au "calife" de l'État islamique (EI), Abou Bakr al-Baghdadi. Et proclamer la naissance de la branche de Barqa (Cyrénaïque) de l'EI. Le 11 novembre, le leader d'Ansar al-Charia à Derna, Abou Soufian Ben Qumu, se ralliait à l'EI de Cyrénaïque. Zone de non-droit dans le Sud Autant dire que dans ces conditions, plus personne ne tient le sud du pays et n'est en mesure de contrôler les déplacements. Les craintes dont fait état la France depuis plus de trois mois se concentrent sur le sud-ouest du pays. C’est là que Mokhtar Belmoktar, l’homme le plus recherché de la région, s'est implanté et que la plupart des groupes jihadistes ont trouvé refuge. Paris pousse pour une intervention militaire et peut compter sur l’appui d’une majorité des pays de la sous-région. Le 19 décembre, le G5 Sahel, qui réunit le Tchad, le Niger, le Mali, la Mauritanie et le Burkina, a lancé un appel aux Nations unies pour qu’une force internationale soit créée. Problème : certains pays africains et arabes s’opposent encore à toute intervention. C’est notamment le cas de l’Algérie qui craint que les jihadistes qui auront été chassés du Sud libyen ne se réfugient sur son territoire. Lire l'article sur Jeuneafrique.com 2 de Janeiro 2015

Qual o segredo do Estado Islâmico?

By ERIC SCHMITT/The New York Times DEC. 28, 2014 WASHINGTON — Maj. Gen. Michael K. Nagata, commander of American Special Operations forces in the Middle East, sought help this summer in solving an urgent problem for the American military: What makes the Islamic State so dangerous? Trying to decipher this complex enemy — a hybrid terrorist organization and a conventional army — is such a conundrum that General Nagata assembled an unofficial brain trust outside the traditional realms of expertise within the Pentagon, State Department and intelligence agencies, in search of fresh ideas and inspiration. Business professors, for example, are examining the Islamic State’s marketing and branding strategies. “We do not understand the movement, and until we do, we are not going to defeat it,” he said, according to the confidential minutes of a conference call he held with the experts. “We have not defeated the idea. We do not even understand the idea.” General Nagata’s frustration is shared by other American officials. Even as President Obama and his top civilian and military aides express growing confidence that Iraqi troops backed by allied airstrikes have blunted the Islamic State’s momentum on the ground in Iraq and undermined its base of support in Syria, other officials acknowledge they have barely made a dent in the larger, longer-term campaign to kill the ideology that animates the terrorist movement. Key points in the terror group’s rapid growth and the slowing of its advance as it faces international airstrikes and local resistance. Video by Quynhanh Do on Publish Date December 13, 2014. Four months after his initial session with the outside advisers, General Nagata, one of the military’s rising stars and the man Mr. Obama has tapped to train a Pentagon-backed army of Syrian rebels to fight the Islamic State, is still searching for answers. “Those questions and observations are my way of probing and questioning,” General Nagata said in a brief email this month, declining on orders from his superiors to say any more. The minutes of internal conference calls between General Nagata and more than three dozen experts he convened through Pentagon channels in August and October offer an unusual insight into the struggle to understand the Islamic State as a movement, and where the American military’s top leaders are most focused. One of the panel’s initial observations that has intrigued General Nagata is the Islamic State’s “capacity to control” a population, according to the minutes. It is not so much the number of troops or types of weapons the militants use, the experts said. Rather, it is the intangible means by which the Islamic State, also called ISIS or ISIL, wrests and maintains control over territory and its people. This ability, they discussed, centers on “psychological tactics such as terrorizing populations, religious and sectarian narratives, economic controls.” The minutes, which are confidential but not classified, reveal disagreements among the experts over whether ISIS’ main objective is ideological or territorial — General Nagata encourages competing views, urging the group to have “one hell of a debate” over his questions. But the panel raised doubts whether ISIS “has the bureaucratic sophistication necessary to govern.”

Miguel Albuquerque, líder do PSD-Madeira

À terceira tentativa, Miguel Albuquerque, 53 anos, conseguiu atingir a liderança do PSD-Madeira, desde 1976 com um único titular: Alberto João Jardim. E traçou como seu próximo objectivo conquistar a maioria absoluta nas eleições legislativas regionais que quer antecipar para legitimar-se como próximo presidente do governo. Na segunda volta das directas, realizada esta segunda-feira, o ex-presidente da Câmara do Funchal (1994/2013) alcançou 3949 votos (64,06%) contra 2216 votos (35,94%) do seu opositor Manuel António Correia, membro do governo regional cuja candidatura foi lançada e apoiada por Jardim que assim defraudou as naturais expectativas do seu vice, João Cunha Silva, afastado da corrida na primeira volta por ficar na terceira posição com 15,97% dos votos expressos. Albuquerque venceu em dez dos 11 concelhos e em 46 das 54 freguesias do arquipélago. Num universo de 7163 militantes em condições de votarem, 6.232 foram às urnas, registando-se uma abstenção de 13%. Nesse primeiro round disputado por seis candidatos no passado dia 19, Albuquerque obteve 2992 votos (47,2%), tendo ficado a 175 votos da maioria absoluta, necessária para ser eleito líder. Identificado com “os interesses instalados que têm de ser expurgados”, o secretário regional dos Recursos Naturais, seu opositor desta segunda-feira, teve então 1819 votos, correspondentes a 28,7%. “A partir de agora não existem adversários, mas companheiros de jornada”, declarou Miguel Albuquerque no discurso de vitória nas directas em que os sociais-democratas madeirenses “deram uma lição de liberdade democrática”. Ao anunciar um novo ciclo, Albuquerque comprometeu-se a apresentar um “horizonte de esperança aos madeirenses”, “quebrar bloqueios e isolamentos” e “estabelecer pontes com as instituições do Estado”. “O povo madeirense sabe o que quer. É lucido e soberano nas escolhas políticas, recusa ver repetições esgotadas, e precisa de um novo desígnio colectivo para o futuro da região”, afirma Albuquerque, o primeiro dirigente social-democrata a afrontar o líder histórico do PSD e do governo da Madeira, em 2012, conseguindo um surpreendente votação de 49% contra 51%. Quebrou então, reconhece este advogado, ”o falso unanimismo que estava a estagnar a prática do PSD no seu pensamento, na sua prática, na sua postura, nas suas acções politicas”. Para mudar de atitude e de políticas – deixando de ser um partido “mumificado, governamentalizado e prisioneiro dos interesses instalados” –, Albuquerque assume um pacto com os madeirenses: “Afirmar uma nova visão estratégica para a Região Autónoma e desenhar uma nova agenda centrada na valorização dos nossos recursos e posição geopolítica na bacia do Atlântico, na modernização das instituições e do tecido económico, na coesão social, na captação do investimento estrangeiro e promoção externa das nossas atractividades intrínsecas”. Albuquerque terá apenas quatro meses, se as eleições forem antecipadas, como preconiza, para afirmar o seu projecto e conquistar a confiança dos cerca de 257 mil eleitores madeirenses. E, sobretudo, inverter a tendência descendente da votação no PSD de Jardim que perdeu em toda a região 43 mil votos em seis anos. Entre as eleições regionais antecipadas de 2007 e as autárquicas de 2013, a votação dos sociais-democratas caiu para quase metade, ao passar dos 90 mil para 47 mil votos. Face às últimas autárquicas, perdeu cerca de 25 mil votos. Até às regionais, Albuquerque terá de convencer o eleitorado de que não é cúmplice do “jardinismo” que deixou a região numa aflitiva situação económico-financeira e social, com excesso de endividamento do sector público e privado, diminuição do poder de compra, aumento exponencial do desemprego e da exclusão social. Propõe-se renegociar dívida regional (cujos encargos exigem 200 milhões por ano) e o plano de resgate que impôs significativos cortes, restrições e duplo agravamento fiscal. Caso contrário, diz, “não é possível prolongar a elevadíssima carga fiscal sobre as empresas e as famílias, nem é possível”, por outro lado, levando em conta as receitas correntes e as transferências do Estado (cerca de mil milhões de euros), a região suportar os encargos do passado, assegurar o funcionamento dos serviços públicos essenciais da sua responsabilidade, entre os quais a saúde e a educação (cerca de 70% da despesa), garantir o funcionamento da administração regional e libertar as verbas necessárias para a revitalização da sua economia e combate ao desemprego. PÚBLICO

Carta dos índios ao Presidente Obama

December 28, 2012 Honorable President Barack Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President, My name is Calvin Spotted Elk. I am a direct lineal descendant of Chief Spotted Elk, the Minneconjou leader who was killed at Wounded Knee in 1890 (foto). For many years, my grandfather has erroneously been known as Chief “Big Foot”. His name and certain photographs allegedly taken of him have been the source of some historical confusion since his death. My grandfather’s correct name was Unpan Gleska. This literally means “Spotted Elk”; a female spotted elk, to be precise. After the tragedy, the newspapers published his name as "Chief Big Foot" and a name, which according to my family history was derogatory, became the unfortunate name by which he was to be referred to by for many years. In government delegation council meetings he and my other grandfathers were a part of, he is referred to by his correct English name, "Spotted Elk". The same is true of the Minneconjou Winter Counts kept by Lakota elderly councils during the time he was alive. Only in the newspapers and after his death was he referred to by this name yet the memorial marker and the highway named in his honor both bear the name "Big Foot". While attempting to correct this and other misinformation in the public regarding my ancestor, it came to my attention that Congressional Medals of Honor awarded for service at Wounded Knee in 1890, remain a matter of importance to many people today. My relatives and I, as representatives of the Minneconjou (and now Oglala), humbly request your support as Commander-in-Chief to assist in the revocation of at least eighteen (18) Medals of Honor. As you are probably aware, a Congressional Medal of Honor is awarded by the President in the name of Congress, to military personnel according to a standard of “extraordinary merit.” We feel those medals were not held to that high standard. On December 29, 1890, Minneconjou Chief Spotted Elk and at least 350 Lakota people were intercepted by a Seventh Cavalry detachment under Major Samuel Whitside near Porcupine Butte presently on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. Specific details on what triggered the fight will probably always be debated but it is an historical fact that what ensued was a massacre. There were many eyewitnesses; sources including General Nelson Miles who himself criticized the indiscriminate killing that morning. Historical records detail the tragedy at Wounded Knee so to go into further detail at this time is not necessary but we believe the facts justify careful reconsideration regarding removing those soldiers from the Medals of Honor Roll. In a letter to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs in 1917 then retired Lieutenant General Nelson Miles stated: “The rifle was discharged and a massacre occurred, not only the warriors but the sick Chief Big Foot and a large number of women and children who tried to escape by running and scattering over the prarie [sic], were hunted down and killed.“ Although General Miles was critical of the tactics, he believed the Lakota people at that time should have been under military control. A year prior to his 1917 letter, he was a part of the governing board which ultimately rescinded 911 Congressional Medals of Honor. "On June 3, 1916 Section 122 of the National Defense Act was passed, calling for a board of five retired Army generals to review every award of the Medal of Honor to date. Retired Lieutenant General Nelson Miles presided over the board which rescinded a total of 911 Medals of Honor that were illegitimately awarded. Each of the 2,625 Medals of Honor awarded up to the time of the review was given a number so that each case would be decided on the merit of the action without undue prejudice." I do not know why the following medals were not part of those reviews but because it was General Miles whose efforts, in part, were related to the tragedy, prejudice was outstanding. As you can see, what I am requesting is not something new. Others before me have petitioned. I am aware that two resolutions (SPO-01-100 and DEN-07-082) were submitted by the National Congress of American Indians in 2001 which were tabled for further review. As we go into 2013, twelve years later, I humbly request this issue be brought back for active consideration. I am making this request as only one of the many Lakota people who lost their ancestors at Wounded Knee. One reason this is important is because so many names have been forgotten and some inaccurately recorded. There are only a few names inscribed on the memorial marker but there are many more ancestors buried in the mass grave at Wounded Knee. The monument was erected by a well-meaning family some years after the massacre but even my grandfather's real name was incorrectly inscribed. This has led to further confusion because there was a different leader from the Oglala band who went by the name of Big Foot. It is some of his photographs which have been mistaken for my grandfather. For people from Cheyenne River (where my grandfather was from) and people from Pine Ridge (where our people are buried and where many later settled) this has been a source of conflict and subsequently it has also been a problem for modern scholars. The various lists of names maintained by the tribes originated with a non-native anthropologist in the 1990s. Unfortunately there are still many errors on the list in the form of duplications, mistranslations as well as other types. Unfortunately this problem creates real-world consequences for people. Especially for those who have not been raised knowing who their biological ancestors were. Lakota naming conventions are different than English naming conventions. In our culture, we have a saying: "We are all related." Traditionally, we have referred to some of our relatives in the "Indian way" but they may not have ever been biologically related to us. When the naming conventions were imposed by the census takers, there were problems created that cannot be easily untangled today. Some names were mistranslated into English and lost their meaning. Other names were translated by French interpreters and then into English. Still other names were shortened so much that they barely resemble their original meaning or actually have the opposite meaning. Only by being and knowing Lakota can this ever be untangled. Unfortunately, few people today speak our native language fluently. For the past two years, I have been working with many descendants of survivors from all three reservations in an effort to untangle and correct as many errors as possible so we can finally have a proper memorial for our people. It is difficult and time-consuming work but together we have made steady progress. With each of the people I have spoken with the same issues surface again and again. One of the main ones is the issue I bring to your attention today. Mr. President, will you please consider revoking the medals awarded to the soldiers listed below as well as any subsequent awards which may have been overlooked during our research? We found there were at least eighteen (18) Medals of Honor awarded for Wounded Knee. In contrast, during the four year course of World War II, only three (3) such medals were given to tens of thousands of soldiers from South Dakota. It is incomprehensible that a hundred and twenty two years later, this remains unresolved. It will help to heal a wound between the recent generations of Lakota people and generations of non-native settlers in the area who were brought up with the belief that this was a battle instead of what it was. I feel there is strong justification for removing those soldiers from the rolls and making it clear that this was a terrible tragedy that should never happen again. According to the rules governing the Medals of Honor, "each of the armed services has set up regulations which permit no margin of doubt or error. The deed of the person must be proved by incontestable evidence of at least two eyewitnesses; it must be so outstanding that it clearly distinguishes his gallantry beyond the call of duty from lesser forms of bravery; it must involve the risk of his life; and it must be of the type of deed which, if he had not done it, would not subject him to any justified criticism.” Mr. President, what happened at Wounded Knee was not worthy of this nation's highest award for exceptional valor. The actions of the soldiers have been justly criticized because this was a massacre, not a battle. This tragedy, for many, remains a blemish in American history. My relatives and I pray for this never to happen again and we pray you will hear our plea to put this to rest. I think it will help to lessen conflict in my home state of South Dakota between people who were raised believing falsely that this was a battle and people whose ancestors were victims of a terrible tragedy. I am reluctant to bring it up but as you know, just this month, in America, we have experienced, an unthinkable tragedy with the recent massacre of small children at Sandy Hook School in Connecticut. The circumstances were different between the two massacres but there were some aspects that were the same and for this, my heart truly mourns for the families in Connecticut. A massacre is a massacre no matter when or how it occurred but there is something truly horrifying when children and elders are deprived of their lives. It is especially heartbreaking when those responsible for taking their lives have been rewarded with medals of valor. Tomorrow morning, December 29, evokes painful feelings for Lakota people. Infants, small children, teenagers, elders, women and men, most of whom were unarmed (or very poorly armed) were hunted down for miles around Wounded Knee and killed. A couple of days later, after a blizzard swept through the area, some were amazingly discovered to still be alive, despite their wounds. These were frightened people, on the verge of starvation, whose leader was dying of pneumonia. This was not a true battle. Like the people at Sandy Hook and other places around the world, we should not forget their lives. Unless someone experiences this kind of violent sudden loss personally, it is very difficult to imagine how their surviving families will be affected. In the case where mostly orphans are left, this trauma can last for generations. Native Americans know unresolved grief. Many African Americans know too. There are lessons to be learned from Wounded Knee that will go a long way toward healing hearts and minds everywhere. The healing process takes time but through prayer, acceptance, awareness and forgiveness, it is possible. For many of us, acknowledgment of what happened is at the root of our healing. Many people in South Dakota, native American and not, still hold on to false beliefs that make reconciliation difficult. I pray that be able to honor his sentiment and reconcile differences through truth, compassion and forgiveness. Mr. President, I would like to sincerely thank you for taking time from your busy schedule to consider my request. This last election I voted for the first time in my life and I voted for you because I believe you sincerely wish to change things for the better. I hope you hold the desire to right this wrong so that future generations can live in truth and heal from senseless tragedies like this one. I humbly ask you to consider rescinding the following list of Medal of Honor Recipients (attached). Sincerely and Respectfully, Calvin Spotted Elk Medal of Honor Recipients Who Were Involved in the Massacre at Wounded Knee Creek (29 December 1890):* Name of Soldier Date of Issue William G. Austin 27 June 1891 John E. Clancy 23 January 1892 Mosheim Feaster 23 June 1891 Ernest A. Garlington 26 September 1893 John C. Gresham 26 March 1895 Mathew H. Hamilton 25 May 1891 Joshija B. Hartzog 24 March 1891 Harry L. Hawthorne 11 October 1892 Marvin C. Hillock 16 April 1891 George Hobday 23 June 1891 George Lloyd 16 April 1891 Albert W. McMillan 23 June 1891 Thomas Sullivan 17 December 1891 Frederick E. Toy 26 May 1891 Jacob Trautman 27 March 1891 James Ward 16 April 1891 Paul H. Weinert 24 March 1891 Hermann Ziegner 23 June 1891 Respectfully, Calvin Spotted Elk On behalf of the Spotted Elk family of descendants

A pensar na sucessão de Ban Ki-moon

Current speculation is focused on Eastern Europe, the region that has never produced a U.N. leader. The first candidates out of the block include Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite (foto) and two Bulgarians — Irina Bokova, UNESCO’s executive director, and Kristalina Ivanova Georgieva, a European commissioner, an economist, and a former World Bank vice president. Slovakian Foreign Minister Miroslav Lajcak and Jan Kubis, a former Slovakian foreign minister and the current U.N. special representative for Afghanistan, are also in the running. Danilo Turk, a former Slovenian president and onetime top U.N. official, and Vuk Jeremic, a former Serbian foreign minister and a former U.N. General Assembly president, have also begun promoting their candidacy. "The smart money in 2016 will be on an East European acceptable to Moscow and supported by the rest of the P-5," Tharoor said in an emailed response to questions from Foreign Policy. "Anyone who doesn’t fit that description will start the race with a crippling (but not necessarily insuperable) handicap." Not everyone is certain that the Security Council’s key powers, deeply divided over Ukraine, will agree on an Eastern European candidate. The prospect of deadlock has encouraged aspirants from other parts of the world to explore a possible candidacy. "Any candidate in Eastern Europe will be seen as too close to Russia or too close to the West," said one U.N. official. "The well has been poisoned." Russia may block candidates like Bulgaria’s Georgieva who either come from European Union countries or are too closely associated with Western Europe. Jeremic, whose country, Serbia, is pursuing EU membership but has friendly ties to Russia, faces a possible Western veto. One European diplomat said Jeremic would ascend to the top U.N. job "over the P3’s dead body." (The P3 is a reference to Britain, France, and the United States.) Helen Clark, a former prime minister of New Zealand and currently the head of the U.N. Development Program, is believed to be running a stealth campaign for U.N. chief from her day job. Kevin Rudd, a former Australian prime minister who recently took up an appointment at the Asia Society in Manhattan, providing him a perch for lobbying U.N.-based dignitaries, has also expressed some interest in the job, according to a senior New York-based diplomat. Neither is in a position to publicly declare his or her candidacy as long as the Eastern Europeans are still under consideration, according to diplomatic observers. Clark declined through a spokeswoman to comment for this article. A Clark spokeswoman, Christina LoNigro, told Foreign Policy that "Helen Clark has stated consistently that she loves the job she currently has as the administrator of the U.N. Development Program." But the two former prime ministers’ prospects may be buoyed by the fact that a candidate from the Western European and Others Group has not held the secretary-generalship since the 1980s, when Austrian Kurt Waldheim’s second term ended. In making the case for Clark’s candidacy, New Zealand has also noted the importance of appointing the first female U.N. secretary-general in history. "It’s high time that the U.N. had a woman as secretary-general," New Zealand’s prime minister, John Key, told the New Zealand Herald in June. "I think it would be a very proud day for New Zealand if [Clark] became the next secretary-general." Still, Key also played down Clark’s chance of winning. "Those jobs are Herculean tasks to win and there’s so much politics at play that it’s not straightforward, but in the event that she ran, we would definitely support her," he told the newspaper. Clark has said her gender would boost the profile of the world’s most visible diplomatic post. "There will be interest in whether the U.N. will have a first woman because they’re looking like the last bastions, as it were," she told the Guardian. "If there’s enough support for the style of leadership that I have, it will be interesting." In recent months, Clark has been trying to earn a reputation as a reformer by launching a belt-tightening campaign that has led to rare staff cuts at the U.N. Development Program. But her candidacy took a hit in October when the United States’ congressionally created watchdog responsible for monitoring U.S. funds for the payroll of Afghan police sharply criticized the U.N. Development Program for mishandling hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign assistance for the Afghan National Police. The U.N. agency countered that it had drawn the world’s attention to the misuse of funds but that it had limited authority to guarantee that Afghan authorities used the funds correctly. But Clark and Rudd may face a far steeper hurdle than the Afghan payroll problem. Latin American governments believe they may have a claim on the top U.N. job, noting that Westerners have held the top U.N. job for longer than any other region. Among the names of potential candidates being floated in New York’s diplomatic circles are well-known leaders, including Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff and Chilean President Michelle Bachelet. But Bachelet, a popular candidate within U.N. corridors, will still be Chile’s president when a U.N. leader is selected. Besides, the P5 has shown a particular allergy for appointing prominent world leaders for the top U.N. job, preferring less well-known foreign ministers and former U.N. envoys. A head of state has never been elected U.N. secretary-general. Other names floating include Alicia Bárcena, a Mexican national who once served as former Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s chief of staff; Rebeca Grynspan, a former Costa Rican vice president who has held top U.N. posts; and Colombian Foreign Minister María Ángela Holguín Cuéllar. William R. Pace, executive director of the World Federalist Movement, which has been leading a campaign to open the election process for U.N. chief, said that the likeliest choices would be from Eastern Europe. "But there is also huge interest in having a woman candidate." Pace noted that other international organizations, including the World Health Organization and the World Trade Organization, have taken steps to include more countries in the process of selecting their top officials, a step the United Nations has yet to take. He is among a group of a dozen nonprofit groups that have appealed to U.N. General Assembly members to reform the selection process. "The selection of the new Secretary-General in 2016 will be one of the most important decisions the General Assembly will make in the next ten years," according to a letter the group wrote to U.N. member states. "It is crucial that the best and most highly qualified candidate is selected to become UN Secretary-General." The group called for establishing "formal selection criteria, a call for nominations and a clear timetable for the selection process that enables adequate assessment of candidates, including through an official list of candidates and the submission of candidate vision statements." That type of politicking would be a major shift for the world body, where few have ever campaigned openly for the job. Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, a reserved Peruvian diplomat, found political campaigning unseemly and refused appeals by his own government to travel to New York to meet with key ambassadors responsible for determining whether he would be named secretary-general. This reticence "reflected my long held view that a candidate make no promises or commitments or become indebted to a particular country or group of countries that could later prejudice his or her judgment and action," he wrote in his memoir, Pilgrimage for Peace. He ultimately got the job. Brian Urquhart, one of the U.N.’s first employees, seemed appalled at the spectacle of open competition in 1969 when a Finnish diplomat decided to embark on a public campaign, writing in his memoir, A Life in Peace and War, that "the quest for the Secretary-Generalship began to deteriorate into a disorderly and often bizarre political struggle." But he acknowledged in the book that the traditional closed-door selection process often led to "a candidate who will not exert any troubling degree of leadership, commitment, originality, or independence." Egyptian Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, one of the most independent of the U.N. top leaders and certainly one of the most honest, was more pragmatic. Faced with the prospect of Bill Clinton’s administration blocking his bid for a second term, Boutros-Ghali appealed to U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher to win the White House’s backing. To drive home his case for American support, he reminded Christopher that he had given plum U.N. jobs to American officials. "I had done so, I said, because I wanted American support to succeed in my job," he wrote in his memoir, Unvanquished. It is precisely this kind of backroom dealing that has fueled bitterness over the entire election process. "I wouldn’t call it rigged, but it’s very politicized," Switzerland’s Seger said of the election process. He said a more open campaign could contribute to a "merit-based selection" process. As a first step, he suggested that candidates could come before the General Assembly for a hearing and take questions on their "goals and objectives." Sitting in his Midtown Manhattan office, Seger handed out a small stack of General Assembly resolutions dating back to August 1997 that call for greater transparency in the election, granting the General Assembly a role in sending candidates to the Security Council, and holding public hearings with candidates so they can describe their visions for the United Nations. None of the steps was ever implemented, but Seger suggested that doing so could at least theoretically make a difference. "The ballgame will be quite a different one," he said. "It will be more difficult for the P5 just to handpick someone [when] the wider membership was able to express its views." If recent history is an example, handpicking the next secretary-general is exactly what might be the likeliest outcome. Ban introduced the modern campaign process into the U.N. secretary-general race, with the South Korean government moving aggressively on his behalf by signing trade deals with Security Council members and promoting his prospects in key big-power capitals. Tharoor said the 2006 election had an "unprecedented level of public exposure for the candidates," though that didn’t seem to make much of a difference. "The eventual winner … did not participate, confirming that public campaigns had minimal impact on the outcome," he said. "The only government which undertook a yearlong, well-structured, and amply financed campaign among the 15 Security Council members, including announcements of bilateral development assistance, was South Korea — and its candidate won." Foreign Policy

Tunísia: Presidente eleito tem 88 anos

Veteran politician Beji Caid Essebsi has been confirmed as winner of Tunisia's first free presidential poll. He secured 55.68% of the vote in Sunday's run-off, defeating caretaker president Moncef Marzouki (44.32%), the head of the electoral commission said. Mr Marzouki, a 67-year-old former exile, earlier refused to admit defeat. Mr Essebsi, 88, has urged all Tunisians to "work together" for stability but critics say his win marks the return of a discredited establishment. They point out that he served under President Zine el-Abedine Ben Ali, who was ousted in 2011 after the Arab Spring revolution triggered uprisings across the region. Mr Essebsi was also in the cabinet of Tunisia's first post-independence leader, Habib Bourguiba. Earlier on Monday, police fired tear gas in the southern city of Hamma to disperse hundreds of demonstrators who burned tyres in protest at Mr Essebsi's victory. The results of the run-off vote were announced by the head of the electoral commission, Chafik Sarsar, who was visibly emotional. It is the first time Tunisians have been able to vote freely for their president since independence from France in 1956. Analysis: Naveena Kottoor in Tunis Chafik Sarsar - the head of the electoral authority - was visibly emotional and his voice broke several times as he announced the winner of Tunisia's first freely elected president. The former law professor has been under intense pressure to ensure the voting period runs smoothly. The man who will move into the presidential palace overlooking the bay of Tunis is 88-year-old Beji Caid Essebsi. The leader of the Nidaa Tounes, which has largest share of seats in the new parliament, has served under two autocratic presidents. Tunisians joke that he and his party represent the old regime, but with an injection of Botox. Mr Essebsi is politically savvy and pragmatic and has to be credited for agreeing to enter a dialogue last year with his arch-enemies, the moderate Islamist Ennahda party, to resolve a political crisis at the time. BBC