Ban Ki-moon to succeed Kofi Annan

[kurth]

S Korean a shoo-in for UN top job after big powers back him
Mark Coultan, Herald Correspondent in New York
October 4, 2006

THE South Korean Foreign Minister, Ban Ki-moon, is all but certain to become the next United Nations secretary-general after an informal poll found no opposition from any of the big powers. His main challenger, the UN's Undersecretary-General for Public Information, Shashi Tharoor, from India, immediately withdrew from the race after discovering that none of the veto-holding powers would vote against Mr Ban. The South Korea is likely to be formally voted in as the only candidate to be recommended to the UN General Assembly on Monday to succeed Kofi Annan.

He received 14 "encouragement" votes in the fourth straw poll conducted on Sunday among the 15 Security Council members, the first vote to distinguish between the votes of the permanent members - the US, Russia, China, Britain and France - and the 10 non-permanent members. Mr Ban has led each of the polls, and it became clear that no veto would be used against his candidature. It was also clear last week that he had the support of the US, whose first priority is overhauling the sprawling UN organisation, both to make it more efficient and prevent a recurrence of scandals, such as that involving the oil-for-food program.

However, Mr Ban, who was educated at Harvard, has made it clear he will focus on diplomacy and appoint someone else to handle the day-to-day management of the UN. For the developing world the biggest issue is the fulfilment of the millennium goals of economic development. Inevitably, the media will focus on Mr Ban's first efforts at diplomacy, whether they be implementation of the ceasefire in Lebanon, defusing the Iran crisis, or finally doing something about the slaughter in Darfur...

Mr Ban, 62, the son of a farmer, was a child during the Korean War and has lived to see his country become one of the world's 15 biggest economies. His country is a child of the UN, owing its existence to a war fought by troops under the UN flag in the 1950s. Thus he may be ideally placed to appeal to both the Western and developing worlds - the north and south, in the parlance of the UN - which form the deepest schism in the organisation. But there is a question mark over whether Mr Ban is the ideal candidate or simply the least objectionable. Although he is universally acknowledged as an affable, well-liked individual, questions have been raised whether he has the strength of character to move nations in intractable disputes. He has countered suggestions that he is too soft for the job by saying Asians value humility, but that this should not be construed as weakness.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/s-korean-a-shooin-for-un-top-job-after-big-powers-back-him/2006/10/03/1159641325822.html

[flordehinojos]

1. the US via JOHN the bully BOLTON is not opposing Ban-ki Moon?

i wonder what ties he might have to the bush regime?

[ShaneGR]

2. It's not really the Bush regime, its the US as a whole...

South Korea is entirely dependent on us for their defense vs North Korea. Other major ties include US trade rights, etc. Without the US, S. Korea is N. Korea and run by a dictatorship.