FYI... --- Partha Gogoi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To: Dilip Datta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Partha Gogoi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:10:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: View of Tharoor: A Lesson I think Dilip, we are mixing Apples and Oranges here. The UN Secy General post is selected from a list of "compromise candidates" - generally from "middle powers" or "developing" countries. North America has not had a Secy General - Franklin D Roosevelt laid the foundation in 1949 but did not become the Secy General. Same case with Australia. In the early 60s, Nikita Khruschev (the Russian leader) tried to abolish the post of Secy General but the neutral powers vetoed against it. We need to examine the political processes at work (the larger picture!) before drawing analogies. We have to ask certain questions - has the UN played a role in balancing world power? its has no power whatsoever. Was it able to prevent the Iraq war? Where are the reforms? I will be happy if Tharoor makes it but it will be another rhetoric. And in the end, a "compromise" candidate. The UN is becoming more of a defunct org. Right now, after South America and Africa, guess whose turn it is to have a Secy General? Asia!! How about Europe? It has not fielded its candidate since 1981. I am not trying to undermine Shashi Tharoors efforts. But reality needs to be brought to light. Indias pride should not depend on an Indian making it to the UN chief post - it has to focus on its economic growth. I tell you - the Indian media will go ga-ga over this. More power to its masses by education and developing its human capital at the grass-roots. More money into innovation and technological breakthroughs. I rest my case. Thanks, Partha > --- Dilip Datta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/assamonline/message/2502?l=1
