<<  天主教教会：性丑闻 | 首 页 | 主权基金：不爱国债爱银行  >>

  • 美国和联合国：尊重

    2007-08-03

    [2007.7.27]A matter of honour尊重

    International
    America and the UN 美国和联合国
    A matter of honour 尊重
    Jul 26th 2007 | NEW YORK
    From The Economist print edition
    A row over the UN's record in North Korea gets very close and personal, to everyone's detriment
    一场有关联合国朝鲜工作的论战现在不分胜负，而且演变为对个人的攻击，几败俱伤。

    RELATIONS between the United States and the United Nations seemed to be mending when Zalmay Khalilzad, a veteran of diplomacy in very hot spots (first his native Afghanistan, then Iraq), took over in April as America's envoy to the world body.
    今年四月份，热点地区外交老手扎勒米·哈利勒扎德（Zalmay Khalilzad）出任美国驻联合国大使，美国和联合国的关系似乎有望得到改善。（哈利勒扎德出生于阿富汗，曾先后出任美国驻阿富汗大使和驻伊拉克大使。）

    AFP Melkert: a Dutchman flies into a storm梅尔科特：卷入风波的荷兰人

    Having guided Afghanistan towards democracy and struggled with tribal and sectarian politics in Iraq, Mr Khalilzad was viewed as a wily conciliator, epitomising a more flexible American policy: one that looked for consensus on how to deal with tricky problems. More than his abrasive predecessor, John Bolton, he accepted that the UN could do some useful things.
    哈利勒扎德曾经引导阿富汗走上民主之路，也曾与伊拉克的部族政治、宗派政治作斗争，因此，人们将他看作一位老谋深算的调解人，他代表更加灵活的美国政策： 总是在如何解决棘手问题上寻求共识。比起生硬粗暴的前任约翰·博尔顿（John Bolton），哈利勒扎德更愿意承认联合国发挥的作用。

    All the stranger, then, that the mood in American-UN relations has in recent weeks been darkening again. Behind the latest row are American complaints that the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) broke its own rules by disbursing Western currency to North Korean citizens—and possibly abetted the Pyongyang government's military ambitions—as it administered agricultural projects worth $2m a year.
    然而出人意料的是，美国和联合国的关系在最近几周又变得紧张了。在最近的论战中，美国抱怨联合国开发计划署(UNDP)在掌管每年200万美元的农业规划资金期间，违反自身规定把西方国家的钱花在朝鲜公民身上，并且认为这一行为很有可能助长平壤政府的军事野心。

    Both America and the UN proclaim identical goals: full disclosure of any malpractice that may have occurred, avoidably or otherwise; and suitable corrective action, in the event that the regime in Pyongyang lets the agency (which was forced to leave in March) resume its work.
    对于该事件，美国和联合国声明的目标一致：彻底披露所有可能发生过或可以避免的违规行为并做出适当纠正，从而使平壤政权能够允许联合国开发计划署继续其在朝鲜的工作（该机构于今年三月份被迫撤离朝鲜）。

    It is not only on New York's East River that emotions are running high. An Albanian ex-manager of UNDP operations in Pyongyang, Artjon Shkurtaj, claims to have been victimised after blowing the whistle on abuses. In Tirana, where denouncers of sleaze are a rareish breed, he has been hailed as a hero. The Dutch press, meanwhile, sees an American “smear campaign” against a countryman even nearer the heart of the affair: Ad Melkert, the UNDP's second-ranking official and (significantly, many say) an ex-chairman of the World Bank's ethics committee. (In the probe which led to the downfall of Paul Wolfowitz as head of the World Bank, Mr Melkert's evidence was crucial: he said he did tell Mr Wolfowitz to move his girlfriend, Shaha Riza, out of the Bank, but denied endorsing the very sweet terms.)
    不仅纽约东河沿岸人们的情绪持续高涨。阿尔巴尼亚人什库尔特耶（Artjon Shkurtaj）曾负责联合国开发计划署在平壤的工作，他声称自己曾因揭发违规行为而受到迫害。在地拉那（阿尔巴尼亚首都），鲜有人公然谴责利用丑闻攻 击对手的行为，他在那里被人们誉为英雄。同时，荷兰媒体看到美国人“竞相污蔑”自己的荷兰同胞梅尔科特（Ad Melkert），他甚至快成了整个事件的中心人物。梅尔科特是联合国开发计划署第二号人物，（值得注意的是）他也是前世行道德委员会主席。（在导致原世 行行长沃尔福威茨下台的调查中，梅尔科特的证词至关重要：他说他确实曾经让沃尔福威茨把女友莎哈·丽扎（Shaha Riza）调离世行，但他反对为其加薪的条件。）

    American and UN officials all say they want to know what went wrong in Pyongyang, and how to correct it. The bare facts—that payments were made in hard currency, and that North Korean conditions make this hard to avoid—are not in doubt. So why don't they work together? That is a harder question. Wherever the problem lies, it does not seem to reflect bad chemistry between Mr Khalilzad and the head of the UNDP, Kemal Dervis, an eminent Turkish economist who oversaw his country's financial recovery. The two men respect each other. And till recently, the Bush administration liked the UNDP. Last year it praised the agency for being “supportive of US strategic interests in democracy, prosperity and security”.
    美国和联合国的官员都说他们想知道在平壤出了什么问题，像知道如何来校正这个问题。这些简单明了的事实是毋庸置疑的：支付时使用的是硬货币，针对朝鲜的情 况也只能以这种方式支付。那么美国和联合国为什么不一起努力呢？这个问题更难回答。不管问题出在哪里，都不会对哈利勒扎德和联合国开发计划署署长凯末尔· 德尔维什（Kemal Dervis）之间的关系造成不好的影响。德尔维什是一位著名的土耳其经济学家，他指导土耳其经济复苏。二人彼此敬重。直到近来之前，布什政府一直都挺喜 欢联合国开发计划署。去年，布什政府还赞扬了该机构，因为它“支持美国在民主、繁荣与安全方面的战略利益。”

    But these days UNDP staff feel under siege. They complain that American officials have fed copious details of their agency's alleged misdeeds in North Korea to the press, to Congress and to other UN missions—while those same officials have made it hard for the UNDP to defend or correct itself, by refusing to give the agency any incriminating documents that detail what it is supposed to have done wrong. American officials say the UNDP has engaged in a cover-up; UNDP officials retort that the Americans won't tell them what sort of thing they are allegedly hiding.
    但是近来联合国开发计划署官员感觉遭到围攻。他们抱怨美国官员已经把大量所谓联合国开发计划署在朝鲜的违规行为都仔细地告知了媒体、国会和其他联合国代表 团——但是这些美国官员却拒绝为联合国发展计划署提供任何详细说明其行为不当的指控文件，使该机构难以自我辩护或改正。美国官员说联合国发展计划署有意隐 瞒真相；而联合国发展计划署的官员反驳说美国根本讲不出他们涉嫌隐瞒了什么。

    If their aim was to blacken the UNDP, then leaks to American newspapers and to Republicans in Congress have had the desired effect. Headlines like “dollars for dictators” duly appeared, and Republican legislators denounced the UNDP for hiding its misdeeds and “firing” Mr Shkurtaj. David Morrison, the UNDP's spokesman, replies that Mr Shkurtaj's contract simply expired in March; Mr Shkurtaj says “Morrison doesn't know shit” and insists he could have worked until 2008 if he had not spoken up for moral rectitude.
    如果这些美国官员目的是要诽谤联合国发展计划署，那么向美国报纸和国会的共和党人披露就已经达到目的了。“给独裁者的钱”之类的新闻大标题如期出现，共和 党立法委员公开指责联合国开发计划署不但隐瞒其违规行为，还“炒”了什库尔特耶（Shkurtaj）。联合国开发计划署发言人大卫·莫里森（David Morrison）回应说什库尔特耶的合同只是三月份到期。什库尔特耶说“莫里森狗屁不通”，并强调如果他没有出于道义公正揭露那些事情，就能够工作到 2008年。

    Mr Shkurtaj says he spoke out after being shocked by the discovery of $3,500 in counterfeit American bills, sitting in the UNDP safe in Pyongyang. The UNDP says the money was handed in by an Egyptian consultant in 1995, and forgotten: an oversight, yes, but hardly an appalling scandal.
    什库尔特耶说发现平壤的联合国开发计划署保险箱里有3，500美元的伪造美钞时，他感到非常震惊并在后来揭发此事。联合国开发计划署说钱是1995年一位埃及顾问交来的，但却忘了：这是一次疏忽，没错儿，却也绝对是令人震惊的丑闻。

    Some Europeans at the UN are unimpressed by the charge sheet against the UNDP which the American mission has circulated; their governments quietly made up a $20m grant to the UNDP which America's Congress withdrew after being briefed by Mike Wallace, the Bush administration's point man on UN reform.
    美国代表团传播的这个针对联合国的指控记录，并没有影响到在联合国工作的一些欧洲人：他们的政府静静地凑足2000万美元捐赠给联合国开发计划署。    迈克·华莱士（Mike Wallace）是布什政府处理联合国改革问题的要人，在收到他的报告后，美国国会没有参与捐款。

    Whatever lies behind them, certain items on the charge sheet look serious. American officials say they have evidence of around $15m in UN money being misused by North Korea between 2001 and 2005; this allegedly included $7m used to buy property in Britain, France and Canada. They also claim the UNDP was duped into providing computer equipment that could be used for a nuclear programme, without first seeking an export licence as had been done in 1999. UNDP officials say the most sophisticated thing they provided was crop-forecasting equipment.
    不管背后隐藏着什么，案件记录上的还是有几条看起来很严重。法美国官员说他们有证据表明2001年到2005年期间，朝鲜滥用了联合国的大约1500万美 元资金，并涉嫌将其中的700万美元用于在英国、国和加拿大购买房地产。他们还声称联合国开发计划署受到蒙蔽，在没有像1999年一样办理出口许可证的前 提下，提供了可用于核计划的计算机设备。 而联合国开发计划署官员说他们提供的最复杂的设备是作物产量预测设备。

    To Europeans, it looks as if some Americans' main motive is personal: to punish Mr Melkert for betraying Mr Wolfowitz. But it would be sad if settling scores were the decisive factor in the outcome of a dispute where real issues are at stake, like the need to scrutinise the way all Western agencies do business with dictators.
    在欧洲人看说，某些美国人的动机似乎主要是针对个人，即为了惩罚梅尔科特出卖沃尔福威茨。这是一种不确定真相的论战，与争论是否有必要仔细审查所有西方机构与独裁者打交道的方式一样，如果其结果是由报复因素决定的， 那将是悲哀的。

    Perhaps those two eastern sophisticates, Mr Dervis and Mr Khalilzad, should cut through the squabbling and sort the matter out. The honour in which both men are held would only grow.
    也许，这两位“东方通”——德尔维什先生和哈利勒扎德先生，应该从这次论争中走出来，把问题解决掉。    那样的话，二人将会受到人们越来越广泛的尊重。

    注释：
    Hard currency 硬通货in economics, refers to a currency in which investors have confidence, such as that of a politically stable country with low inflation and consistent monetary and fiscal policies, and one that if anything is tending to appreciate against other currencies on a trade-weighted basis. Examples of hard currencies at this time include the United States Dollar, the Euro, the Pound Sterling, the Japanese Yen, and the Swiss Franc. Before its replacement with the Euro the Deutschmark was considered perhaps the hard currency par excellence.

    随机文章：


    收藏到：Del.icio.us




    引用地址：
    发表于09:08 | 编辑 | 继续话题 | 转发 | 分享　0