Εχθές το βράδυ έλαβα από τον David Plouffe, διευθυντή της προεκλογικής εκστρατείας του Barack Obama, το βίντεο ολόκληρης της ομιλίας του υποψηφίου των Δημοκρατικών για την Προεδρία των Η.Π.Α. στο Βερολίνο.Το παρουσιάζω εδώ, αν και μπορεί ο οποιοσδήποτε να to βρει στο youtube.
Πέμπτη 24 Ιουλίου 2008
Iran Isolation Attempts Backfire
γράφει ο Hannes Artens
initially published at Foreign Policy in Focus
διαβάστε επίσης:
Η Κεντρική Ασία στο επίκεντρο του ενεργειακού ανταγωνισμού
Iran’s provocative missile tests ten days ago again fueled the debate on the likelihood of aerial strikes against Iran. Since last week’s thaw, however, an attack on Iran by the end of President Bush’s tenure no longer appears in the offing. Moreover, the narrow, exclusively military focus of the debate misses the broader picture. The overall U.S. strategy of containing Iran has failed in principle. And the attempt to impose a sanctions regime on Iran has led to an erosion of U.S. strategic influence in Asia and the Middle East. Over the long term, Washington’s shortsighted containment policy will only hurt Western business in the region. It will also play into the hands of China, drive crucial allies away, and render Iran untouchable.
At the eleventh hour, even the Bush administration seems to have realized, albeit in a limited way, the inherent failure of the containment approach. In an important about-face, the White House not only agreed to direct talks between U.S. and Iranian officials in Geneva this weekend but also held out the prospect of soon opening an American interest section in Tehran. This sea change suggests that the realists around Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates having finally gained the upper hand over the faction around Vice President Dick Cheney in the intra-administration feud. The reversal also acknowledges that the dual approach of sanctions and military threats have produced nothing but America’s own isolation. The far-reaching repercussions of these counterproductive sanctions against Iran and America’s increasing isolation in Asia are best illustrated by this month’s breakthrough on the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline.
It’s the Gas, Stupid
The Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline (IPI) is a $7.5 billion project designed to supply Indian mega-cities with natural gas from Iran’s Persian Gulf fields via a 1,700 miles long pipeline across Pakistan. The project has been repudiated and boycotted by one project partner or the other uncounted times since its conceptualization. But on July 3, Indian Oil Minister Murli Deora affirmed on the sidelines of the World Petroleum Congress in Madrid that India expects to finally sign the deal next month. This long-time-in-coming breakthrough constitutes a crucial step toward energy security for India.
For the United States, on the other hand, it deals a resounding blow to the fragile international sanctions front the Bush administration has crafted to contain Iran. What is more, with China keen on joining the project, a new geo-strategic axis – Tehran-Islamabad-New Delhi-Beijing – is about to emerge. This axis will radically reshuffle the power structure in Asia and, with it, the global balance of power.
Despite the Cheney faction’s saber-rattling, the Bush administration has banked on economic sanctions strangling investment and beating a technology-dependant Tehran into submission. This strategy of tightening the economic corset choking Iran and thus forcing it to renounce its nuclear ambitions, however, has isolated the United States and its allies more than Iran. For the time being, Washington has succeeded in cajoling French Total SA, Anglo-Dutch Shell, and Spanish Repsol to withdraw their bids to exploit the Iranian South Pars field, the world’s largest gas field, and the EU approved freezing the assets of a major state-owned Iranian retail bank, Bank Melli, last month.
But Iran’s countermeasures have been in the works for quite a while. After all, the country has long suffered from the effects of sanctions and the reluctance of Western companies to invest in its energy sector. So it has increasingly looked eastward for new financiers and partners. The most striking example is Iran’s March 24 bid for membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Central Asian security group dominated by Russia and China.
This new “looking east” -- negahe be shargh -- policy concept is the brainchild of Bangalore-educated, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki. While an Iranian SCO membership is still in the future, Asian dominance over the Iranian market is a current reality. China already ranks as the number one foreign investor in Iran. Malaysian Petronas and LG Korea feature prominently in the exploitation of South Pars. The new IPI would be a final nail in the coffin of the sanctions regime.
The Empire Strikes Back
The United States has fought hard against the new pipeline linking Iran, India, and Pakistan. As recently as July 15, Senators Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Richard Shelby (R-AL) threatened to strengthen the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 that allows for the litigation of foreign firms investing in sanctionable business in Iran – a clear warning signal to India. Meanwhile, since the three countries could not bear the projected costs of $7.5 billion on their own, Washington has also used its considerable influence at the World Bank in the person of former president Paul Wolfowitz. He bluntly informed Pakistan that the bank would not allow any international institution to finance the project.
In its attempts to destabilize Iran and disrupt the possible route of the pipeline, the United States is allegedly supporting Jundallah. This militant insurgency in the Iranian Sistan and Baluchistan Province, has suspected links to the Taliban and the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), which has been fighting a guerilla war against the Pakistani army since 2000. This clandestine Baloch connection – recently exposed by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker – undermines America’s fragile, always-on-the-brink-of-a-coup ally, Pakistan. Washington is also pushing for the alternative of a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline (TAPI), the construction bids for which, as a side benefit, would go to U.S. companies. This alternative scheme is strikingly similar to the pipeline deal Unocal struck with the Taliban in 1996.
U.S. obstruction is not the only problem facing the IPI project. Iran is asking for a lot of money; India and Pakistan have notorious difficulties cooperating. But this cluster of American threats and coercions proved until recently to be pivotal in preventing the project from getting off the ground. Former Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns cited preventing IPI as one of his greatest accomplishments at a conference at Harvard University in March.
Push Factors
India, however, desperately needs energy for its growing economy. And it will risk its relationship with the United States to get this energy. Moreover, its heavily subsidized low gas prices are no longer sustainable, especially now before an election year. After all, with oil around $140 per barrel and a global recession looming on the horizon, the United States no longer has the ability to pressure countries to sever energy ties with Iran, as it did when a fire-breathing John Bolton forced Japan to withdraw its bid to exploit the Iranian Azadegan oil field. It is now every country for itself in the new energy environment.
Despite U.S. opposition, then, the IPI pipeline is back on line. The last commercial difficulties between Pakistan and India concerning transit fees have been cleared away, and only minor technical details remain for a trilateral meeting in Tehran scheduled for the coming weeks. If an agreement is reached this summer, construction could commence in 2009 and be completed by 2012. Pakistan is eager to expand its new role as the energy corridor of the future. It expects an annual $600 million in transportation fees from IPI and is vigorously politicking for China to join the project in order to increase those revenues. Until Indian consent was secured, Pakistan used the Chinese wild card as a bargaining tool to force a wavering India’s hand. But now it seems that Islamabad and Tehran can have it both ways. If World Bank financing is off the table, China can step in to foot the bill.
Finalization of IPI in the coming weeks would be more than a slap in the face for President Bush. After all, in 2006 he personally fought for a nuclear cooperation pact with India designed to meet India’s energy needs while tying it closer to the United States as a counterweight against a rising China. Now however, not only has the Indian government so far failed to get the pact ratified in the Indian parliament, but India is about to collaborate with China in undermining America’s sanctions on Iran. Pakistan, beefed up with more than $10 billion in military aid by the Bush administration, is also giving the cold shoulder to Washington. And Iran, soon to be the number one energy supplier for East Asia, becomes more untouchable by the day.
The Bush administration’s lofty design to keep Iran in the box and use the Indian tiger to tame the Chinese dragon runs the risk of collapsing in the last months of his presidency. In fact, the American sanctions regime is driving Iran into China’s arms and facilitating a Sino-Indian rapprochement. Even worse, America is facing the rise of a new strategic axis in Asia that stretches from Tehran to New Delhi to Beijing, with Islamabad as a central hub, and financed by petrodollars. Then again, the Bush policy, by giving a lift to this new strategic energy alliance, may ultimately strengthen support in Washington for a military strike against Iran: to accomplish what containment failed to do.
At the eleventh hour, even the Bush administration seems to have realized, albeit in a limited way, the inherent failure of the containment approach. In an important about-face, the White House not only agreed to direct talks between U.S. and Iranian officials in Geneva this weekend but also held out the prospect of soon opening an American interest section in Tehran. This sea change suggests that the realists around Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates having finally gained the upper hand over the faction around Vice President Dick Cheney in the intra-administration feud. The reversal also acknowledges that the dual approach of sanctions and military threats have produced nothing but America’s own isolation. The far-reaching repercussions of these counterproductive sanctions against Iran and America’s increasing isolation in Asia are best illustrated by this month’s breakthrough on the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline.
It’s the Gas, Stupid
The Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline (IPI) is a $7.5 billion project designed to supply Indian mega-cities with natural gas from Iran’s Persian Gulf fields via a 1,700 miles long pipeline across Pakistan. The project has been repudiated and boycotted by one project partner or the other uncounted times since its conceptualization. But on July 3, Indian Oil Minister Murli Deora affirmed on the sidelines of the World Petroleum Congress in Madrid that India expects to finally sign the deal next month. This long-time-in-coming breakthrough constitutes a crucial step toward energy security for India.
For the United States, on the other hand, it deals a resounding blow to the fragile international sanctions front the Bush administration has crafted to contain Iran. What is more, with China keen on joining the project, a new geo-strategic axis – Tehran-Islamabad-New Delhi-Beijing – is about to emerge. This axis will radically reshuffle the power structure in Asia and, with it, the global balance of power.
Despite the Cheney faction’s saber-rattling, the Bush administration has banked on economic sanctions strangling investment and beating a technology-dependant Tehran into submission. This strategy of tightening the economic corset choking Iran and thus forcing it to renounce its nuclear ambitions, however, has isolated the United States and its allies more than Iran. For the time being, Washington has succeeded in cajoling French Total SA, Anglo-Dutch Shell, and Spanish Repsol to withdraw their bids to exploit the Iranian South Pars field, the world’s largest gas field, and the EU approved freezing the assets of a major state-owned Iranian retail bank, Bank Melli, last month.
But Iran’s countermeasures have been in the works for quite a while. After all, the country has long suffered from the effects of sanctions and the reluctance of Western companies to invest in its energy sector. So it has increasingly looked eastward for new financiers and partners. The most striking example is Iran’s March 24 bid for membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Central Asian security group dominated by Russia and China.
This new “looking east” -- negahe be shargh -- policy concept is the brainchild of Bangalore-educated, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki. While an Iranian SCO membership is still in the future, Asian dominance over the Iranian market is a current reality. China already ranks as the number one foreign investor in Iran. Malaysian Petronas and LG Korea feature prominently in the exploitation of South Pars. The new IPI would be a final nail in the coffin of the sanctions regime.
The Empire Strikes Back
The United States has fought hard against the new pipeline linking Iran, India, and Pakistan. As recently as July 15, Senators Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Richard Shelby (R-AL) threatened to strengthen the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 that allows for the litigation of foreign firms investing in sanctionable business in Iran – a clear warning signal to India. Meanwhile, since the three countries could not bear the projected costs of $7.5 billion on their own, Washington has also used its considerable influence at the World Bank in the person of former president Paul Wolfowitz. He bluntly informed Pakistan that the bank would not allow any international institution to finance the project.
In its attempts to destabilize Iran and disrupt the possible route of the pipeline, the United States is allegedly supporting Jundallah. This militant insurgency in the Iranian Sistan and Baluchistan Province, has suspected links to the Taliban and the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), which has been fighting a guerilla war against the Pakistani army since 2000. This clandestine Baloch connection – recently exposed by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker – undermines America’s fragile, always-on-the-brink-of-a-coup ally, Pakistan. Washington is also pushing for the alternative of a Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline (TAPI), the construction bids for which, as a side benefit, would go to U.S. companies. This alternative scheme is strikingly similar to the pipeline deal Unocal struck with the Taliban in 1996.
U.S. obstruction is not the only problem facing the IPI project. Iran is asking for a lot of money; India and Pakistan have notorious difficulties cooperating. But this cluster of American threats and coercions proved until recently to be pivotal in preventing the project from getting off the ground. Former Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns cited preventing IPI as one of his greatest accomplishments at a conference at Harvard University in March.
Push Factors
India, however, desperately needs energy for its growing economy. And it will risk its relationship with the United States to get this energy. Moreover, its heavily subsidized low gas prices are no longer sustainable, especially now before an election year. After all, with oil around $140 per barrel and a global recession looming on the horizon, the United States no longer has the ability to pressure countries to sever energy ties with Iran, as it did when a fire-breathing John Bolton forced Japan to withdraw its bid to exploit the Iranian Azadegan oil field. It is now every country for itself in the new energy environment.
Despite U.S. opposition, then, the IPI pipeline is back on line. The last commercial difficulties between Pakistan and India concerning transit fees have been cleared away, and only minor technical details remain for a trilateral meeting in Tehran scheduled for the coming weeks. If an agreement is reached this summer, construction could commence in 2009 and be completed by 2012. Pakistan is eager to expand its new role as the energy corridor of the future. It expects an annual $600 million in transportation fees from IPI and is vigorously politicking for China to join the project in order to increase those revenues. Until Indian consent was secured, Pakistan used the Chinese wild card as a bargaining tool to force a wavering India’s hand. But now it seems that Islamabad and Tehran can have it both ways. If World Bank financing is off the table, China can step in to foot the bill.
Finalization of IPI in the coming weeks would be more than a slap in the face for President Bush. After all, in 2006 he personally fought for a nuclear cooperation pact with India designed to meet India’s energy needs while tying it closer to the United States as a counterweight against a rising China. Now however, not only has the Indian government so far failed to get the pact ratified in the Indian parliament, but India is about to collaborate with China in undermining America’s sanctions on Iran. Pakistan, beefed up with more than $10 billion in military aid by the Bush administration, is also giving the cold shoulder to Washington. And Iran, soon to be the number one energy supplier for East Asia, becomes more untouchable by the day.
The Bush administration’s lofty design to keep Iran in the box and use the Indian tiger to tame the Chinese dragon runs the risk of collapsing in the last months of his presidency. In fact, the American sanctions regime is driving Iran into China’s arms and facilitating a Sino-Indian rapprochement. Even worse, America is facing the rise of a new strategic axis in Asia that stretches from Tehran to New Delhi to Beijing, with Islamabad as a central hub, and financed by petrodollars. Then again, the Bush policy, by giving a lift to this new strategic energy alliance, may ultimately strengthen support in Washington for a military strike against Iran: to accomplish what containment failed to do.
initially published at Foreign Policy in Focus
διαβάστε επίσης:
Η Κεντρική Ασία στο επίκεντρο του ενεργειακού ανταγωνισμού
Τετάρτη 23 Ιουλίου 2008
Μια θέση για την Τουρκία στο Συμβούλιο Ασφαλείας...;
Στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες βρέθηκε αυτές τις ημέρες ο Ali Babacan, ο γνωστός... wannabe “κουμπάρος”, στην θέση του σημερινού Tayyip Erdogan, με σκοπό την προώθηση της υποψηφιότητας της Τουρκίας για μία θέση μη μονίμου αντιπροσώπου στο Συμβούλιο Ασφαλείας των Ηνωμένων Εθνών, για την περίοδο 2009-2010.
Αν μη τι άλλο, ενθουσιασμός διακατέχει τους διπλωματικούς κύκλους της γειτονικής μας χώρας, η οποία ελπίζει σε θετική εκτίμηση της υποψηφιότητάς της. Να σημειώσουμε ότι η Ισλανδία και η Αυστρία έχουν εκδηλώσει το ενδιαφέρον τους για την ίδια θέση και οι Τούρκοι μιλούν απαξιωτικά γι' αυτές τις δύο υποψηφιότητες, κυρίως, για την Αυστρία!
Ενδεικτικό του κλίματος που επικρατεί στην Άγκυρα, αποτελούν οι δηλώσεις του Sedat Laciner, προέδρου του ISRO/USAK, ο οποίος σημειώνει με νόημα ότι “... οι φίλοι της Τουρκίας αυξάνονται...”, ... “διότι η Τουρκία έχει κάνει πολλά βήματα προς τα μπρος, ιδιαίτερα στην εφαρμογή της εξωτερικής της πολιτικής στην περιοχή της Μέσης Ανατολής... όπως για παράδειγμα στις Συρο-ισραϊλινές σχέσεις, όπου η Άγκυρα αναλαμβάνοντας τον ρόλο του “φιλικού” διαμεσολαβητή, λειτουργεί ως “γέφυρα”... “ειρήνης”... “συνεννόησης” και “συνεργασίας”. Και συνεχίζει, λέγοντας ότι... “το Σ.Α. έχει ανάγκη από μία χώρα σαν την Τουρκία, η οποία μπορεί να εγγυηθεί για την ασφάλεια και την σταθερότητα σε περιοχές και για χώρες που χρήζουν την ανάληψη συγκεκριμένων πρωτοβουλιών και την εφαρμογή πολιτικών εξομάλυνσης...”
Τώρα, δεν είμαι σε θέση να αποφασίσω κατά πόσο αυτές οι ενθουσιώδεις σκέψεις δικαιολογούνται από την πραγματικότητα, όταν η πολιτική κατάσταση στην χώρα είναι ακόμη ρευστή... η Ευρωπαϊκή της πορεία αμφισβητούμενη και ζητήματα όπως το Κυπριακό, έχουν μπει σε νέα τροχιά διαπραγμάτευσης και μάλιστα με τις γνωστές αιτιάσεις και προκλήσεις από τουρκικής πλευράς...
Αναρωτιέμαι ποια θα ήταν η συνεισφορά της Τουρκίας ως μέλος του Σ.Α. – προς όφελος της διεθνούς κοινότητας – όταν καθημερινά εγείρει και νέες διεκδικήσεις έναντι των γειτόνων της και απροκάλυπτα εργάζεται στην εφαρμογή της επεκτατικής της στόχευσης ιδιαίτερα στον χώρο της Κεντικής Ασίας (με ό,τι αυτό σημαίνει π.χ. πολεμικές επιχειρήσεις έναντι των Κούρδων, πολιτική χειραγώγηση των τουρκογενών χωρών της Κεντρικής Ασίας, καταπάτηση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων και οικονομική εκμετάλλευση των φυσικών πόρων...) και με γνώμονα πάντα την διεισδυτική της δυναμική στον ευρύτερο γεωγραφικό της χώρο...
Η Τουρκία, υπήρξε μέλος του Σ.Α. των Ηνωμένων Εθνών τις περιόδους 1951-52, 1954-55 και 1961... περίεργες συμπτώσεις....
Αν μη τι άλλο, ενθουσιασμός διακατέχει τους διπλωματικούς κύκλους της γειτονικής μας χώρας, η οποία ελπίζει σε θετική εκτίμηση της υποψηφιότητάς της. Να σημειώσουμε ότι η Ισλανδία και η Αυστρία έχουν εκδηλώσει το ενδιαφέρον τους για την ίδια θέση και οι Τούρκοι μιλούν απαξιωτικά γι' αυτές τις δύο υποψηφιότητες, κυρίως, για την Αυστρία!
Ενδεικτικό του κλίματος που επικρατεί στην Άγκυρα, αποτελούν οι δηλώσεις του Sedat Laciner, προέδρου του ISRO/USAK, ο οποίος σημειώνει με νόημα ότι “... οι φίλοι της Τουρκίας αυξάνονται...”, ... “διότι η Τουρκία έχει κάνει πολλά βήματα προς τα μπρος, ιδιαίτερα στην εφαρμογή της εξωτερικής της πολιτικής στην περιοχή της Μέσης Ανατολής... όπως για παράδειγμα στις Συρο-ισραϊλινές σχέσεις, όπου η Άγκυρα αναλαμβάνοντας τον ρόλο του “φιλικού” διαμεσολαβητή, λειτουργεί ως “γέφυρα”... “ειρήνης”... “συνεννόησης” και “συνεργασίας”. Και συνεχίζει, λέγοντας ότι... “το Σ.Α. έχει ανάγκη από μία χώρα σαν την Τουρκία, η οποία μπορεί να εγγυηθεί για την ασφάλεια και την σταθερότητα σε περιοχές και για χώρες που χρήζουν την ανάληψη συγκεκριμένων πρωτοβουλιών και την εφαρμογή πολιτικών εξομάλυνσης...”
Τώρα, δεν είμαι σε θέση να αποφασίσω κατά πόσο αυτές οι ενθουσιώδεις σκέψεις δικαιολογούνται από την πραγματικότητα, όταν η πολιτική κατάσταση στην χώρα είναι ακόμη ρευστή... η Ευρωπαϊκή της πορεία αμφισβητούμενη και ζητήματα όπως το Κυπριακό, έχουν μπει σε νέα τροχιά διαπραγμάτευσης και μάλιστα με τις γνωστές αιτιάσεις και προκλήσεις από τουρκικής πλευράς...
Αναρωτιέμαι ποια θα ήταν η συνεισφορά της Τουρκίας ως μέλος του Σ.Α. – προς όφελος της διεθνούς κοινότητας – όταν καθημερινά εγείρει και νέες διεκδικήσεις έναντι των γειτόνων της και απροκάλυπτα εργάζεται στην εφαρμογή της επεκτατικής της στόχευσης ιδιαίτερα στον χώρο της Κεντικής Ασίας (με ό,τι αυτό σημαίνει π.χ. πολεμικές επιχειρήσεις έναντι των Κούρδων, πολιτική χειραγώγηση των τουρκογενών χωρών της Κεντρικής Ασίας, καταπάτηση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων και οικονομική εκμετάλλευση των φυσικών πόρων...) και με γνώμονα πάντα την διεισδυτική της δυναμική στον ευρύτερο γεωγραφικό της χώρο...
Η Τουρκία, υπήρξε μέλος του Σ.Α. των Ηνωμένων Εθνών τις περιόδους 1951-52, 1954-55 και 1961... περίεργες συμπτώσεις....
διαβάστε επίσης:
Η Τουρκική ηγεμονία: Μήπως βρισκόμαστε λίγο πριν την αναβιώση της Οθωμανικής Αυτοκρατορίας;
Το σύνδρομο της «παιδικής χαράς» στην εφαρμογή του Διεθνούς Δικαίου
Σχετικά με την εξωτερική πολιτική των Τούρκων
"Προτεραιότητα της τουρκικής εξωτερικής πολιτικής η Κύπρος"
Προκλητική παρουσία Ερντογάν στα Κατεχόμενα
Επισκέψεις υψηλόβαθμων αξιωματούχων των ΗΠΑ στην Άγκυρα
update #1, 24/07/08:
Turkey's dangerous message to the muslim world
update #2, 18/9/08:
πηγή: strategy-geopolitics.blogspot.com
Η Τουρκία συγκεντρώνει πλέον μεγάλες πιθανότητες να είναι μη μόνιμο μέλος του Συμβουλίου Ασφαλείας των Ηνωμένων Εθνών τη διετία 2009-2010. Διπλωματικές πηγές στην έδρα του διεθνούς οργανισμού θεωρούν σίγουρη την εκλογή της Αυστρίας, ενώ στη μάχη μεταξύ Τουρκίας και Ισλανδίας για την ίδια γεωγραφική περιφέρεια αναμένεται να κερδίσει η πρώτη. Η ψηφοφορία θα πραγματοποιηθεί στα μέσα του ερχόμενου μήνα. Η Ελλάδα ήταν μη μόνιμο μέλος του ΣΑ τη διετία 2005-2006, ενώ η πρώτη θητεία της (1952-1953) συνέπεσε με αυτήν της Τουρκίας, η οποία κατείχε θέση τη διετία 1951-1952. Η χρονική συγκυρία συμμετοχής της τουρκικής αντιπροσωπείας στο Συμβούλιο Ασφαλείας κρίνεται ιδιαίτερα ανησυχητική λόγω του γεγονότος ότι το 2009 θα κορυφωθούν οι διεργασίες στο Κυπριακό. Παράλληλα δεν αποκλείεται, όπως εκτιμούν διπλωματικοί κύκλοι, μέσα στην επόμενη διετία, αν η διαδικασία στο θέμα της ονομασίας των Σκοπίων οδηγηθεί σε αδιέξοδο, τα Σκόπια να προσφύγουν στον ΟΗΕ ζητώντας αναγνώριση με τη συνταγματική ονομασία τους. Οι ψήφοι των -δέκα συνολικά- μη μονίμων μελών στο Συμβούλιο Ασφαλείας είναι ζωτικής σημασίας, καθώς για την έγκριση των ψηφισμάτων χρειάζονται τουλάχιστον εννέα θετικές ψήφοι και κανένα βέτο από τα πέντε μόνιμα μέλη.
update #3, 18/10/08:
Κατά την ψηφοφορία που διεξήχθη χθες στην έδρα των Ηνωμένων Εθνών, η Τουρκία, η Ιαπωνία, το Μεξικό, η Ουγκάντα και η Αυστρία αναδείχθηκαν ως τα νέα μη-μόνιμα μέλη του Συμβουλίου Ασφαλείας του Οργανισμού για την περίοδο 2009-2010.
Να σημειώσω ότι αυτή είναι η 10η φορά που η Ιαπωνία καταλαμβάνει θέση μη-μόνιμου μέλους!
Η ψηφοφορία διεξάγεται στην Γενική Συνέλευση και απαιτείται πλειοψηφία 2/3 για την εκλογή μιας χώρας στο Συμβούλιο Ασφαλείας. Ψηφοφορία πραγματοποιείται ακόμη και για εκείνες τις περιοχές από τις οποίες μία χώρα είναι υποψήφια, όπως για παράδειγμα στην περίπτωση του Μεξικού για την Λατινική Αμερική και της Ουγκάντα από την Αφρική.
Μεγάλη χαμένη αυτήν την φορά, αναδείχθηκε η Ισλανδία η οποία - κατά γενική ομολογία- απέτυχε στην εκλογή της, λόγω της πρόσφατης οικονομικής κρίσης και της κατάρρευσης του τραπεζικού της συστήματος, γεγονός που επέτρεψε στην Τουρκία και την Αυστρία να καταλάβουν τις αντίστοιχες θέσεις του Βελγίου και της Ιταλίας.
Εγγραφή σε:
Σχόλια (Atom)