Clinton and the United Nations
By Erick Posted in History — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Reports are circulating that Bill Clinton wants to be the next Secretary-General of the United Nations. Here's why that is not going to happen.
The United Nations has several unwritten rules, precedents, and traditions that keep the peace within the organization (not that Clinton considers such things sacred). One of those traditions is that the appointment of the Secretary-General rotates around the world. Right now it's Africa's turn. It is widely considered to be Asia's turn next. China is reported backing, along with US support, a Thai diplomat.
Another even more important unwritten rule is this:
Past secretaries general have come from various regions of the world, but it is an unwritten rule that they never should come from one of the most powerful countries. This tradition is a response to concerns that a secretary general selected from such a country would not be perceived by other nations as objective or neutral. There is also a fear that such a selection would give the world’s most influential nations that much more power.
While Clinton has shown little regard in the past for tradition and unwritten rules, this rule has been fairly rock solid. Popular former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was rejected for the role because Africa demanded it's turn. After the US vetoed Butro-Butros Gali's second five year term, Kofi Annan was chosen to honor the tradition of having one region keep the Secretariat for two terms.
Even without the unwritten diplomatic rules of the United Nations, there is another reason this won't happen. While Kerry might want to use the idea for political value during the campaign, it is doubtful he would want Clinton upstaging him on the world stage, likewise with Bush.
All in all, this is most likely just a political ploy to put Clinton's name out front, build good will for the former President, and link him to Kerry for Kerry's benefit. In the end, however, Kerry, should he embrace the idea for political gain, risks showing his lack of international statemanship by advocating the disruption of a longterm rule of diplomatic etiquette.
« "We're All Gonna Die!!!!!!!!!!!" — Comments (44) | J. S. Mill, anti-Christian — Comments (19) »
Clinton and the United Nations 4 Comments (0 topical, 4 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
How could they even contemplate this when his wife is a sitting United States Senator and probably eventually a candidate for president.
Clinton and his buddies up in Chappaqua must be smoking those funny brown cigarettes with no writing on the wrapper again --- only this time he's inhaling.
Hey, I'm all for it! Bill Clinton has some issues, but being articulate and likeable is his greatest asset! Period! He would be great as the Secretary/General (or whatever)!
Plus, the fact that we already know he's a lawyer and a crook wouldn't hurt his standing in that particular crowd. Probably be the best represenative we ever had in that "August" body! With what we know now, even if he gets a BJ a week and it's featured on Jon Stewart or David Letterman, so what, He never even got close to the magnitude France has with the "Oil for Food" Scam!
And so what if Hillary runs? Just so she don't win!
- Erick,
Wow, I guess I'm responding to an old post, but so are the other guys. I agree with you that it is all but impossible, but I still think it would be nice.
As another post indicates, it would thwart a Hillary for Prez bid (unless it happened after her election - cringe!!), and it might succeed in keeping Bill Clinton out of American politics for a while. Good for us!
Moreover, he can't possibly be worse than Kofi Annan, and should he become embroiled in controversy ... really not if but when ... then it might paralyze that pernicious international body long enough to prevent a huge amount of mischief.
Nevertheless, you're right. It won't happen. Not worth thinking about, except that it would be so much fun to read about.
The U.N. is never going to let a Republican be Secretary-General. As much as I disliked having him as President, he's a lot more conservative then Kofi Annan or any other person who might realistically get the post. And I think it would be to America's advantage (and the improvement of the U.N.) to have an American in that post. I do agree that the odds of the rest of the world allowing ANY American to become Secretary-General are very slim. But if we have the opportunity to put an American in there, we should jump at it, regardless of party.
Plus, there's NO WAY that Hillary could be elected President while Bill was serving in the U.N.!