Louise ARBOUR's Failed UN Term?

Full Disclosure: I am not a fan of Mme. ARBOUR (see this piece).

I feel this strong denunciation by a Toronto lawyer Mr. Glenn COHEN - is unfair.

1) COHEN acknowledges the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is overrun with countries run by repressive, non-democratic regimes1. Further, it is widely acknowledged that the High Commissioner (HC) does not necessarily play a role in the Council - yet COHEN tags the numerous Council resolutions critical of Israel on Mme. ARBOUR (Mr. COHEN states that 46% of UNHRC statements in 2006 were critical of Israel. Unfortunately UN Watch's review did not include 2006). While possible that Mme. ARBOUR had some role in drafting, introducing or influencing resolutions that came before the Council - it is debatable and quite defensible that she may not have had any role in approving them what so ever.

2) According to Geneva-based Human Rights Group UN Watch, Mme. ARBOUR made 79 critical statements directed at 39 different countries during 2007/8. This amounts to 3 rebukes per month. I am sure a good deal of painstaking research from hostile resources must take place before anything is released. The majority (69) were directed at "non-democratic" nations including Myanmar who received 7 warnings - the most of any nation. Council members2 were largely absent of criticism. I am not sure if this is because they must ratify the HC's statements or what, but it is not surprising that many are not partial to being self-critical3. Israel received 4 warnings - the same as Zimbabwe, Nepal, DR Congo, Afghanistan and Sudan whereas Lebanon received only 1 "mild" citation. 4 of 79 direct citations - however misconstrued or misguided - does not seem to constitute "disproportionate" as Mr. COHEN states.

3) Condemnation of Mme. ARBOUR's decision to choose when she would "Name and Shame" or take a "quiet diplomacy" approach is moralistic. But it is a legitimate criticism. As UN Watch noted "There is no magic formula for how to criticize countries". Many influences went into her choices but presumably our evaluation of her success should measure results, not the process. Yet it is disappointing when democratic countries with a free and open press that provide balanced reportage suffer official international disapprobation whereas many countries with repressive regimes and a non-free media which is a mere front for official propaganda do not.

4) Diplomacy at the UN does not function in a simple and direct manner as one might think, in fact on close inspection it seems alot closer to "Alice in Wonderland". UN Watch identifies two seemingly innocuous resolutions under which support was indicative of "many regular acts of intimidation by regimes interested in hiding their abuses."4 Supporters unaccountably included many "free" states like Argentina, Brazil, Chile, India and Mexico, while South Korea and Switzerland merely "stood by" allowing the injustice by abstaining from the vote.

5) Given the task of taming dozens of totalitarian/authoritarian regimes, many of whom openly flaunt Human Rights can not be a simple job. Some may call it impossible. Mme. ARBOUR certainly failed in adjusting expectations and setting objectives by which she could be fairly judged.

6) If UN Watch has the neutral moral compass needed to crititic Mme. ARBOUR, she appears to have recieved what I would call a C+ grade. They have not showered Mme. ARBOUR with the same vehement criticism as Mr. COHEN.

Mr. COHEN seems to have an axe to grind. He obviously doesn't take kindly to any criticism of Israel. I have often observed such an attitude by supporters of Israel. It reminds me of the period leading up to the US invasion of Iraq. Any citizen was pilloried as disloyal to question the White House determination - dissent was quashed and a "my country right or wrong" attitude took hold. That attitude no longer has much credibility and the press has in fact faced alot of criticism for not "challenging" conventional wisdom more strongly at the time.

Undoubtedly, Mme. ARBOUR failed to tame the UNHRC - yet to believe otherwise is the failure we should address.

Footnotes:
1) The Right to Name and Shame: An Analysis of the Tenure of Former UN High Commissioner Louise Arbour with Recommendations for New High Commissioner Navanethem Pillay. August 4, 2008, UN Watch. Mme. ARBOUR was appointed High Commissioner of the UNHRC from July 1 2004 to 2008 but this report studies only 2007-8.

As UN Watch notes "As High Commissioner she is subject to the authority of the Secretary-General of the UN but wears two hats in that she serves the Human Rights Council but also has a significant role as an independent voice to promote human rights."

The Council consists of 47 nations. Those considered "*free" include Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, S. Korea, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Switzerland, Ukraine, UK and Uruguay (23) - while those "partly free*" were Bahrain, Bolivia, Bosnia, Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Djibouti, Gabon, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Philippines and Zambia (14) - and those "not free" Angola, Azerbaijan, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia and Saudi Arabia (10). *Freedom rating taken from 2008 Freedom in the World Survey by Freedom House. 23 are free, 14 partly free and 10 not free. This means a majority of 51% (24 of 47) fall short of basic democratic freedoms.

2) Of 79 critical statements, 23 were weak, 32 moderate and 24 strong. Russia and China sustained minor rebukes.

3) As UN WATCH claimed "[Mme. ARBOUR] was silent, or spoke out no more than once, on systematic human rights abuses committed by China and Russia, both permanent members of the Security Council, and on those committed by Egypt, a country that exercises great influence at the Human Rights Council through its leading position in various UN country groupings. Similarly, Mme. ARBOUR only issued one statement for human rights victims in Angola, Chad, and Kazakhstan, whose very systems deny basic civil and political freedom." P.2, The Right ti Name and Shame.

4) They were UN Human Rights Council Resolution 7/2 of 27 March 2008, “Composition of the staff of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.” Sponsored by the Cuban government. Adopted by a vote of 34 in favor, 10 opposed, and 3 abstentions and UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/61/159 of 19 December 2006, “Composition of the staff of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.” Sponsored by the Cuban government. Adopted by a vote of 118 in favor, 7 opposed, and 55 abstentions.

Why was Kyle WEESE Free?

Fast on the heels of Mr. GUNTERS article on "Why Gun Bans won't work" came the news of this shooting death of an innocent bystander in Toronto.

Incredibly, the jerk-kneed editorials of Liberal rags like the Toronto Star AGAIN suggested the problem would have been solved if a "handgun ban" was in place. INCREDIBLE! No exploration of the fact that the perpetrator was a career criminal out on bail on a previous handgun charge.

Lorne GUNTER makes a completely common-sense suggestion in sayoing that a good first step towards preventing such murders of innocent bystanders would be rational sentences with no parole for violent crimes - rather than tying to impose onerous useless regulations of ordinary law abiding citizens. Amen.

Real Healthcare crisis is fear of criticism + lack of transparency

Bombastic Newfie Premier Danny WILLIAMS holds forth at Cancer Diagnosis Inquiry in St. John's.

And then only yesterday, a hospital in High Prairie AB admits that some patients may have suffered unanticipated infections from reused needles used in Dental Surgery since 2001 and Endoscopy procedures since 1991. Thousands may be a risk - although significant the likelyhood is thought to be very small.

Such failures come after a more serious incident involving improperly cleaned medical instruments and equipment in Vegreville in April 2007.

Government R&D merely crowds-out legitimate research

Karen SELICK is - as usual - right on!

I have had experience in this, having helped a start-up try to launch a "green energy" service in 2002/3 right after PM Chretien flip-flopped and announced that Canada would support The Kyoto Accord. This was a tall order given the increase in heavy oil production in Alberta since the 1990 base period - but we figured there would be growing interest in energy efficiency and lots of government support due to the $6bn that was expected to be committed to implementing Kyoto.

It was just like Karen described and was a complete bust. Federal government departments like EnerCan fell over themselves promoting "energy efficient" ideas and hype - often with the implicit understanding that they "maybe" would offer incentives for various projects. I can recall at least 4 projects that might have become customers had they not been seduced away by government plums and promises like free consulting advice and "pilot project" subsidies. I think only 1 is still operating - even though they should have been quite attractive as energy prices skyrocketed and despite tighter "spark spreads" (the "spark spread" is the difference between energy prices and wholesale electricity prices. It indicates the substitution potential for "net metered" power and the "cost advantage" wedge between the 2 energy sources).

Also we attempted to approach operations in the North West Territories (NWT), as we figured we only had to compete against "dirty diesel" power - but their was virtually no interest - as more than 60% of "economic activity" is not actually market-driven work. Most activity is all driven by government transfers - Healthcare, Education, Welfare, Aboriginal Government (most reserves have 50%+ unemployment if measured in the traditional sense, except for government jobs. Technically they are not in the "labour force" and as housing and utilities cost are free or heavily subsidized they merely supplement their welfare payments with traditional hunting, fishing or guiding activities. These are the only "jobs" and are seasonal.) Many men leave and become itinerant workers by taking jobs in the south "remitting" their earnings back to their families. Sometimes a mine opens nearby and they can "commute" (although it may be 100's of kilometers). Given such a fragile "real business" economy - and despite Greenhouse Gas emissions that were far in excess of 1990 levels, the Government of NWT was allowed to ignore the Kyoto Accord limits!

Needless to say, the only remaining incentive was "moral suasion" - which normally came with a big grant and many strings attached (who to hire, what to buy, where and how). Not to mention fighting the perpetual requirements of government administration - who seemed sustained by a never-ending supply of coffee-breaks and meetings.

[Update: Nov 1, 2008 - A few responses have made it into the "Letters" section over past week - have been posted. This one from a retired Business Prof repeated the "public policy" response. But the most self-serving came from Claire M. Morris, president and CEO, Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. She repeated research by economist Edwin MANSFIELD that publicly funded research has generated returns of between 28-50% - worth some $60 billion in 2007. ]

Guns bans do not prevent murders.

Lorne GUNTER makes this point in the National Post very well - so I will not repeat it.

Yet today I heard Mayor David MILLER repeat for the umpteenth time that the problem is guns. That is simply not true - as supported by the facts. That he refuses to address the real problems that drive such heinous crimes - state-sponsored family breakdown, increased criminalization of men, increased substance abuse and gang activity - we will never successfully attack the real problems.

I would also argue that the indifference of local police to rising minor crimes - like car break-ins and theft - is part of the problem that drives citizens to own guns (despite the high regulatory burden and cost). As a friend of mine put it, more and more the police seem to practice "crime management" - that is triaging events into emergency, major and minor (with minor ignored or investigated by the victim with prompting by police via telephone) rather than prevention. And they wonder why the public is losing confidence in their ability.

Source: Statistics Canada Online Juristat. "Homicide in Canada" 85-002-X, Oct 2008.

Tragedy for family of Jennifer HUDSON

What a terrible tragedy for this talented young women. I believe Johnathon KAY is correct when he says this will effect Ms. Hudson in a terrible fashion.

This is the crisis that Sen. Barack OBAMA should dedicate himself to repairing.

St. Crispin's Day

Sadly, a 15 yr-old boy in Barrie ON named Brandon Crisp has been missing for over a week (since Thanksgiving Monday, Oct 13) after an argument with his parents over excessive Xbox use and online playing of Call of Duty 4. In this article from the National Post, "experts" indicate that any obsessive compulsive behaviour should be a red flag to parents about "possible deeper emotional turmoil within their kids lives".

Still another media outlet (CTV) interviewed an expert who said that parents underestimate the degree of social interaction such games involve. In many cases, children derive a high degree of personal identity from the fantasy world of the game and the other participants they meet online. In some cases they can avoid uncomfortable social circumstances because of their online skills and in this way their online "memes" - with whom they may have a huge amount of interactions with - become an important part of their social network.

To help in the search, a number of community volunteers have begun looking for the boy. Microsoft Canada (who produces the Xbox) has contributed to a reward for tips that lead to Brandon being found. They also maybe able to provide information about some of Brandon's online gamer friends. A growing concern is that he may have been aided in his runaway or possibly abducted by a fellow online gamer.

October 25 was before Vatican II1 known as Saint Crispin's Day and was the feast day of the twin Christian Saints Crispin and Crispinian (also known as Crispinus and Crispianus, though this spelling has fallen out of favour), twins who were martyred circa A.D. 286.

I know it primarily for the Battle of Agincourt in 1415, dramatised by William Shakespeare in Henry V, with his famous battle-rousing speech, but is was also the day of other famous battles: the Battle of Leyte Gulf in the Pacific theater in 1944, the Battle of Balaklava (Charge of the Light Brigade 1854) during the Crimean War.

[Update: 2008NOV10 The body of this young boy was found by hunters about 8-10 km from his bike at the base of a tree. It is thought that he suffered critical injuries when he fell from it. A sad story to be sure and the couple and two older sisters are doubtless wracked with guilt and grief over this tragic turn of events. I do feel for them.]

Footnotes:

1) Vatican II was the twentieth century Ecumenical Council of the Roman Catholic Church. It opened under Pope John XXIII in 1962 and closed under Pope Paul VI in 1965. These saints were removed from the liturgical calendar (but not declared to no longer be saints) during the subsequent reforms. The feast remains as a 'Black Letter Saints' Day' in the Calendar of the Anglican Book of Common Prayer (1662) and a 'commemoration' in Common Worship (2000).

The reasoning used by Vatican II for this decision was that there was insufficient evidence that Saints Crispin and Crispinian actually existed. Indeed, their role as shoemakers, their relationship as twins, and the timing of their holiday are suggestive of the possibility that they could have represented a local Celtic deity (Lug-Mercury) which had been made into a saint as a result of syncretism.

Market MAYHEM

Finance Minister Jim FLAHERTY sang yet another "lullaby" to the roiling banking sector this morning offering to "insure" Canadian Bank's debts for a fee. The apparent market effect saw perceived "higher quality/retail" franchises fall (TD, RY) while "poor perceived quality" rose (NA, BMO). The announcements coming from LatAm region recently - the Mexican Banker's Acceptance (BA's) Market has seized up and Argentina's has nationalized the US$30bn private Pension Industry likely had something to do with Scotia Bank (BNS) tanking! (Although it may have just been reaction or hedging related trade to the recent purchase offer for CI Financial).

The "Canadian TED" spread narrowed on the news. The real benefit will be to insulate Canadian banks from the still rampant global banking contagion, despite the relative good health of Canadian Bank sector. Together with the recent temporary loosening of "mark to market" accounting rules may make the Oct 31 FYE for many of the Canadian banks bearable.

We are still in a Global Banking crisis - triggered by meltdown of insolvent U.S Investment Banks, that infected Commercial Banks globally. The crisis has now caused a full blown meltdown of our entire financial system. Bin Laden could not have done better. Contributing mightily to the panic has been the "hair on fire" approach of politicians in the U.K and U.S that dramatically escalated the severity surrounding the initial events - in the UK the nationalization of mortgage lender, Northern Rock PLC in Feb 2008 and in the U.S., the liquidation of investment bank Bears Stearns in March 2008. Both responses ignited a collapse of trust that spread like wild-fire given the widespread speculations and financial alchemy undertaken with full connivance of the federal government through institutions like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

The financial repercussions of the collapse of the banking sector is now spreading to the "real economy" and lending is seizing up or grinding completely to a halt. The stock markets have been showing this turmoil for weeks and - I believe - many other speculative enterprises such as hedge funds attempt to unwind positions due to necessity by bankers or because their "investment thesis" no longer holds water. IMHO, this all of these events will definitely cause a severe Global recession - and indeed all current indications point in this direction. It is not so much a problem of judging an entry point that is near the bottom - as there will continue to be other follow-on earthquakes. It is now a question of all economies regaining the ability to function at all. At that point markets will stabilize and we can begin the recovery process.

What bothers me now is that I can not understand how that recovery can take place without massive deflation (similar to the Japanese experience during their 1990's post-bank collapse) which would render a return to a "normal" yield curve impossible.

I will continue to follow this crisis as event unfold.

[Addendum: Mon Oct 27 - Financial Post: The Next Worry: a deflationary slump, like Japan. Right on cue! Jacquie THORPE refers to Roger BOOTLE's 1996 book "The Death of Inflation" in which he correctly described the phenomena that had gripped Japan following it's banking sector collapse in 1991. He predicts U.S deflation of -2% next year. One aspect that is troubling is that digging out requires vast amounts of public sector spending. In Japan the government pumped billions into the banking sector - M1 (aka M1 or currency in circulation + cash in chequing accounts) grew at 20% while M3 (the broadest measure of Money Supply) barely grew at all. His prescription: get ready for more bailout measures!]

Indoctrinate U

This film is too good to ignore. I especially love the clip where a black female college professor explains how she was turned down for a grant because she does not agree with affirmative action! How's that for racist? (unfortunately is was not included in trailer below).

35 inconvenient UNTRUTHS about Al Gore's crusade?

From Micheal MOORE to Al GORE and David Suzuki - the environmental hysteria continues to run unabated through our media. How can they be so complicit?

Here are 35 factual errors in Al GORE's monumental greenwash movie. It is interesting that the author (Mr. MONCKTON) notes a spokeswomen for Mr. GORE claimed that each of these "facts" was indisputable, whereas MONCKTON points out the opposite and calculates the odds of someone "inadvertently" picking the wrong interpretation in ALL 35 CASES as 36 billion to 1!

Recently (Sep 2008) the current President of Czech Republic, Vaclav KLAUS has undertaken to refute the Global Warming alarmists. He does so based on his experiences and those of many former Soviet Union satellites who understand the massive damage imposed by what I can only describe as propaganda and political "thought control".

[Current Global Warming alarmism is] "...an abuse of science by a non-liberal, extremely authoritarian, freedom and prosperity endangering ideology of environmentalism."

It is a sad comment that despite communism being overthrown we now face a similar threat from within our own democracy.