FoxNews uncovers the special relations between Asma al-Assad and Helen Clark. UNDP called her "a champion of reform".

Before Assad unleashed violence, UN showcased wife Asma as a 'champion' of reform

By George Russell

Published September 20, 2012

| FoxNews.com

Read this on Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09/20/before-assad-unleashed-violence-un-showcased-wife-asma-as-champion-reform/

Before Syrian President Bashar al-Assad unleashed a wave of violence against his own people last year, the United Nations Development Program, or UNDP spent $18 million to create an elaborate structure of reform initiatives to demonstrate that Assad was moving toward a more modern, liberalized regime, according to documents obtained by Fox News.

One major element: creating a high-profile role for Asma al-Assad, the glamorous wife of the Syrian dictator, as a champion of greater citizen participation in the dictatorship’s anti-poverty and social programs.

The process quickly proved to be a façade. As soon as demonstrators took to the streets in March, 2011, demanding a  larger say in how Syria was ruled, the UNDP-sponsored reform movement crumbled as President Assad responded with a campaign of arrest, torture and bombardment.
The multi-million dollar U.N. program, followed by a failed peace effort led by former Secretary General Kofi Annan, demonstrates how the U.N.’s densely written successes on paper can turn to dismal failure once an authoritarian government casts aside everything in favor of keeping a grip on power.

For its part, UNDP insists through a spokesman that its elaborate development plans in Syria are merely “stalled.”

Before the “stall,” the UNDP program in Syria was budgeted for extension beyond its five-year life-span between 2007 and 2011 into 2012-- months after the Assad regime began its long campaign of harsh domestic repression.

The Syrian fiasco also shows the limits of  UNDP’s preferred method of “national execution” of development projects, meaning that it leaves most of the real work to the governments of most of the 169 countries where it operates, with UNDP offering financial and technical assistance and the veneer of U.N. prestige, while encouraging the international community to provide  money.

In the case of Syria, according to documents obtained by Fox News, UNDP played a key role in creating a reformer’s aura around Asma al-Assad, the country’s fashionable First Lady, who was also the founder and chairman of  an organization known as the Syria Trust for Development.

Starting in 2007, Mrs. Assad became  a special partner of UNDP in a five-year program known as the National Platform for NGOs [non-governmental organizations]  aimed at creating  in Syria “an empowered civil society involved in local community development and implementation of public policies, planning and programs.” The Syria Trust, which she created in 2002 as a personal charity vehicle, was reorganized that year into a foundation that incorporated a number of additional social programs.

The Syria Trust-UNDP partnership was intended, among other things, to forge  a “National Platform for Syrian NGOs,” which would “enhance civil society and the private sector in the socio-economic development in place.” Along with providing technical support to the project, UNDP helped provide financing, which totaled more than $570,000 by 2010.

Mrs. Assad is described in the Syrian Trust’s 2009-2010 annual report—the only one publicly available—as an “active champion and sponsor of  civil society activities in Syria.” (The Trust also served as an “incubator” of additional NGOs, which presumably would have access to the National Platform.) The financial report shows that her efforts at the Trust were supported by  a variety of principally Western European governments,  a welter of Syrian state and local governments, and a few U.N. agencies, including UNDP.

CLICK HERE FOR THE ANNUAL REPORT

In the end, however, the “civil society” program provided little more than cover for the regime’s brutal methods of control—even after the Assad government began to escalate its violent onslaught against its own people.

The other partners in Mrs. Assad’s UNDP-organized “National Platform” effort  included the Syrian State Planning Commission, the country’s Interior Ministry, and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor, according in the annex to a “Country Program Action Plan,” or CPAP, signed between Syria and UNDP in June 2008.

CLICK HERE FOR THE CPAP

The CPAP also includes a collaboration between UNDP and the Syrian Computer Society, an organization once run by President Assad himself, before he took political office.
According to the UNDP-Syrian document, the computer society was a partner of UNDP in an effort to build a “National Knowledge Society,” through “dissemination of  community-based IT tools and facilities with special attention to vulnerable groups (disabled people).”

CLICK HERE FOR THE SYRIA TRUST AND COMPUTER SOCIETY REFERENCES IN THE CPAP

The Syrian Computer Society has been accused by non-Syrian NGOs of monitoring their activities and “keeping tabs” on their personnel. It also hosts UNDP’s websites in Syria.

In response to questions from Fox News last month, UNDP declared that  it “does not have any shared programs with SCS and never has,”  even though the computer society is also listed not only in the CPAP but also in another UNDP “country program document” for Syria as a partner in two additional  UNDP programs, involving trade and youth employment.

The computer society is also deeply involved with Mrs. Assad’s Syrian Trust. A five-year Syrian Trust Strategic Plan, dated  December 2010, says that the computer society is the sole donor of technology funds for the Trust’s “Communications and Knowledge Management Division (CMK).”
According to the strategic plan, the CMK’s role is to “help the Trust create and promote its identity and brand, define its desired image, reconcile its reputation with its image, articulate and communicate its mission and objectives, set guidelines for fundraising and partnering, set standards to bring consistency across publications and services, and maintain the technical infrastructure to support automation and knowledge sharing.”

In other words, the Knowledge Management Division, with SCS technical help, is largely the Trust’s propaganda arm.

A March 2011 evaluation commissioned by UNDP itself  to examine the initiative centered on the glamorous Mrs. Assad declared the program a qualified success—even while it also noted that nothing really had changed.

The report observed that the regime had made “no significant legal changes”  to empower civilian organizations, despite promises to do so. It also noted that for all the effort, “few mechanisms exist to hold constructive dialogues between government and local communities and consultation is minimal.”

The evaluation also observed that a new government five-year plan made “little mention of strengthening civil society’s capacity and role in contributing to government policies, planning and programs.”

On a more positive note it declared that “while difficulties remain, NGOs are clearly rising to the challenge and pushing for more space to achieve their development objectives.”
By then, in fact, civil protests against the Assad regime were growing rapidly in southern Syria and the government was preparing to send in tanks to begin the butchery that continues today.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09/20/before-assad-unleashed-violence-un-showcased-wife-asma-as-champion-reform/print#ixzz274JpwBg6

Our Non-Entity U.N. Ambassador Perfect For Obama

Click here to read full article on Investors.com

Rice: A weak U.S. voice at the United Nations. AP View Enlarged Image

Foreign Policy: Our current U.N. ambassador is like the schoolmarm who never gained control over her unruly class. Even when she does talk tough, it doesn't penetrate the noise.
Does anyone know who Ambassador Susan Rice is? Certainly no one remembers anything she has ever said during her more than 3-1/2 years as America's voice within that corrupt nest of vipers in the Turtle Bay section of New York City.
Last Wednesday, in a quintessential example, the ambassador complained that terror state Iran was not being helpful in its dealings with terror state Syria.

Click here to read full article on Investors.com

UNDP climate film showing at US State Department gets sceptic attention ! RTCC

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS ON WWW.RTCC.ORG

By RTCC Staff

A climate sceptic website has offered $500 to anyone who can ‘debunk’ a UN film on glacier melt in the Himalayas.

The film, ‘Himayalan Meltdown’ is a joint project between the UNDP, Arrowhead Films, and Discovery Channel Asia.

It will be given a special screening at the US State Department today (Monday) ahead of a panel event to discuss the impacts of glacier melt in the Himalayas.

However, the event has received attention from the website junkscience.com.

It is offering $500 to anyone who will attend the event and ask a question on camera “that aims to debunk the notion that global warming is causing the Himalayan glaciers to disappear’.

Glacier melt in the Himalayas has remained a controversial issue

since 2007 when the region found itself at the heart of what was called ‘glaciergate’.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had predicted glaciers would

disappear by 2035. In 2010 IPCC head Rajendra Pachauri admitted the report was flawed,

but said glaciers were melting at a faster pace than previous studies indicated.

This position was backed up last month by new research published by the International

Centre for Integrated Mountain Development – the body that tracks glacier retreat across the region.

The research release coincided with Mountain Day at the UN Climate Summit in Durban

last month and found widespread glacial retreat in all areas of the Himalayas.

The UNDP film examines how the shrinking Himalayan glaciers and rising sea levels

are affecting people in China, India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan.

Speaking at the film’s premiere last June, Helen Clarke, head of the UNDP said:

“We will see the impact on the Asian river valleys flowing from the Himalayas –

the mudslides from the shifting monsoon rains, the changing mountain terrain, and

new areas of drought – all posing considerable risk to human life and to the well-being

of more than a billion people.

VIDEO: The 45-minute film was first released in June 2011, at the Asia Society in

Washington and New York, and will be shown to the US State Department audience

for the first time today.

inShare

UNDP and UNOCHA are preparing a secret "reconstruction plan" for the newly Palestine State - Saudi Arabia promises $1.5 Billion Dollars

a team of 12 composed by UNDP, UN-OCHA have been meeting in the past 10 days to draw a reconstruction and development plan for the new State of Palestine.

So far the Saudi Arabia's Mission seem to have promised $1.5 Billion dollars for the programme, and given the austerity times United Nations and UNDP is in, no one can pass-over on $1.5 billion dollars !!

The plan will consist in a two year reconstruction and government capacity building effort.

Gadhafi waging war on his own people - while UNDP continues successfully to build sustainable development in Libya

@eDipAtStateState eDiplomacy

RT @alivein: #Libya Qaddaffi is waging war on his own people. | @speak2tweethttp://bit.ly/ey7mxA (Feb 19)#feb17

The U.S. Should Set Rigorous Standards for U.N. Aid to North Korea

by Brett D. Schaefer

WebMemo #2818

Although Iran's attempt to develop a nuclear weapon is garnering most of the world's attention, the U.S. should not lose sight of the fact that North Korea already successfully detonated two nuclear devices on October 9, 2006, and May 25, 2009. Indeed, the U.S. believes North Korea has enough plutonium for at least half a dozen nuclear weapons[1] and has been striving to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of delivering these weapons by testing its long-range Taepodong-2 missiles twice in recent years.[2]

North Korea's actions have violated numerous United Nations Security Council resolutions. In response to the 2006 missile and nuclear tests, the Security Council passed resolutions 1695 and 1718, which directed that North Korea "suspend all [ballistic missile] activities [and] abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs." The Security Council unanimously condemned the 2009 nuclear test in resolution 1874 and strengthened existing sanctions[3] to ban all weapons exports and imposed travel restrictions and froze the assets of government officials and businesses.[4]

To its credit, the Obama Administration has taken a firm line with North Korea. The White House has refused to indulge Pyongyang's trademark strategy: initiating provocative actions in order to secure concessions. The Administration has also rejected North Korea's demand that the U.S. enter into bilateral negotiations.[5] Considering North Korea's clear opposition to disarming[6] and reports that North Korea is evading U.N. sanctions,[7] America's tough stance is appropriate.

Yet given its otherwise firm stance toward Pyongyang, it is curious that the Obama Administration, as well as Congress, is not more wary of supporting development and humanitarian assistance to North Korea. For example, despite the poor prospects for fruitful negotiations and Pyongyang's history of misusing aid, the U.N. Development Program (UNDP) and other U.N. entities continue to provide assistance to that country. The U.S. should use its influence to curtail this assistance, which can be diverted and misused by the North Korean government, and ensure that it is subject to rigorous monitoring and verification standards.

The U.N. and North Korea

Despite condemning North Korea's violation of multiple Security Council resolutions, several U.N. organizations remain involved in North Korea, including the World Food Program (WFP),[8] UNICEF,[9] and UNDP. The linkage between humanitarian or development efforts and security concerns need not be explicit.[10] However, the tight control the North Korean government imposes on its citizens and over the in-country activities of non-governmental organizations and international organizations providing humanitarian and development assistance should raise concerns about the benefit of such assistance to the North Korean people.

Humanitarian Assistance. Many argue that the U.S. should continue to support the U.N.'s humanitarian work in North Korea regardless of Pyongyang's actions. For instance, U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Lynn Pascoe recently stated, "These are human beings that need the food. It's not the political system. This shouldn't be argued in a political way."[11]

There is little doubt about the suffering of the North Korean people. However, it is the repressive policies of the North Korean government that have most directly contributed to the country's food shortage by constraining internal and external trade and inhibiting private production.[12]Moreover, although the U.N. is currently providing "nutritional supplements to as many as 1.3 million of North Korea's 24 million people,"[13] the overall U.N. effort was dramatically scaled back last year after North Korea informed WFP and the U.S. to reduce and end, respectively, provision of food assistance and ordered five non-governmental organizations involved in distributing the food aid to leave the country.[14] Considering the situation, it is hard to separate the suffering of the North Korean people from the political decisions of the government.

An additional concern is tracking and accounting for international food assistance. Pascoe has argued that "our people believe they have a very clear idea of who's using the food, where it's going, and it's really for the good of the people who need it most."[15] But a 2008 South Korea news story reported that "South Korean military authorities have known since 2003 ... that North Korea has transported rice supplied by the South for humanitarian purposes to frontline units of the North Korean Army."[16] The ability to track such assistance needs to be enhanced if donors are to be confident that humanitarian assistance benefits the people of North Korea--not the government.

Although politically difficult, it is eminently reasonable for the U.S. and other nations to deny additional food and humanitarian assistance to North Korea until the government agrees to rigorous, transparent monitoring standards and delivery verification. Such standards should, at a minimum:

• Allow donors to use international staff and Korean speakers throughout their North Korean operations;
• Grant complete and free access to projects, distribution centers and aid recipients to ensure that aid is not being diverted by the North Korean government; and
• Not impede non-governmental organizations helping to deliver aid and assess need.

UNDP. It is even more reasonable for the U.S. to demand that the UNDP executive board rescind its January 2009 decision to renew UNDP activities in North Korea. Information provided by whistleblowers to the U.S. Mission to the United Nations led the mission to investigate the UNDP program in North Korea. The information gleaned from these inquiries and subsequent media attention led the UNDP executive board to suspend its activities in North Korea in March 2007.

Subsequent reports by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the U.S. Senate[17] and an independent audit commissioned by UNDP[18] confirmed that deficiencies in UNDP rules, procedures, and management permitted North Korea to dictate the composition of UNDP staff, access hard currency, and avoid standard monitoring procedures for projects and financial transactions.

After securing assurances from UNDP on a number of measures (ranging from ineffectual to potential improvements[19]) to prevent further mismanagement, the UNDP executive board voted in January 2009 to resume activities in North Korea.[20] UNDP returned to North Korea in September 2009,[21] and in December 2009, UNDP Administrator Helen Clark announced that UNDP will start "with a small program--around $2.5 million a year and a very small number of employees."[22] UNDP had three foreign staff and 13 North Korean staff in place as of December 2009, and the office will be fully operational in February 2010.

This decision should raise alarm bells among those concerned with pressuring Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear program. As confirmed in both the Senate and independent UNDP audits, the North Korean government was able to circumvent the U.N.'s anti-proliferation sanctions under the previous UNDP program and secure "dual-use" technology (including computers, software, satellite-receiving equipment, and spectrometers) that could be used for its nuclear and military programs. The nature of the North Korean regime makes abuse a near certainty.

Any U.S. Administration interested in ending North Korea's nuclear program should demand a freeze on UNDP activities as long as North Korea remains in violation of Security Council resolutions. This is doubly the case since the seven UNDP projects,[23] unlike food aid, would not focus on relieving the suffering of those most affected by the depredations of the North Korean government: the people of North Korea.

Bringing Pressure to Bear

A recalcitrant and unrepentant North Korean regime should not be rewarded. Although under the right circumstances humanitarian assistance could alleviate the suffering in North Korea, the U.S. and other countries are justified in demanding assurances that their charity is not being misused. Suspending UNDP programs in North Korea should be even less controversial since these programs are not focused on immediate relief.

The U.S. is a major contributor to and sits on the executive boards of UNDP, WFP, and UNICEF. The Obama Administration, bolstered by financial incentives from Congress, should demand that these organizations curtail or suspend their North Korea programs until rigorous, transparent monitoring standards and delivery verification are implemented and, in the case of UNDP, suspend all activities until Pyongyang complies with Security Council resolutions and ends its nuclear program.

Brett D. Schaefer is Jay Kingham Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs in the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation and editor of ConUNdrum: The Limits of the United Nations and the Search for Alternatives (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2009).

---

[1]CNN, "North Korea Refuses to Abandon Nukes," February 22, 2010, athttp://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/02/19/north.korea.nuclear/ (February 25, 2010).

[2]For a history of provocative actions by North Korea, see Hannah Fischer, "North Korean Provocative Actions, 1950-2007," Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, updated April 20, 2007, at http://www.fas.org
/sgp/crs/row/RL30004.pdf (February 25, 2010).

[3]Colum Lynch, "U.N. Security Council Sanctions 10 in N. Korea," The Washington Post, July 17, 2009, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn
/content/article/2009/07/16/AR2009071602417.html; Ewen MacAskill, "U.N. Approves 'Unprecedented' Sanctions Against North Korea over Nuclear Test," The Guardian, June 12, 2009, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/12/
un-north-korea-nuclear-sanctions (February 25, 2010).

[4]United Nations, "Security Council, Acting Unanimously, Condemns in Strongest Terms Democratic People's Republic of Korea Nuclear Test, Toughens Sanctions," June 12, 2009, at http://www.un.org/News/
Press/docs/2009/sc9679.doc.htm (February 25, 2010).

[5]Hwang Doo-hyong, "U.S. Sees No Immediate Sign for 6-Way Talks Reopening: State Dept.," Yonhap News, February 12, 2010, athttp://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2010/02/13/26/0301000000AEN20
100213000200315F.HTML (February 25, 2010).

[6]In a recent statement by the Korean Central News Agency, North Korea blamed the U.S. for its weapons program and announced that it will not abandon its nuclear program "even if the earth is broken to pieces unless the hostile policy towards [North Korea] is rolled back and the nuclear threat to it removed." CNN, "North Korea Refuses to Abandon Nukes."

[7]Patrick Worsnip, "North Korea Maneuvers to Evade U.N. Sanctions: Experts," Reuters, November 18, 2009, at http://www.reuters.com/
article/idUSTRE5AH5NQ20091118 (February 25, 2010).

[8]According to WFP, "Due to the low levels of resources received for the emergency operation, WFP was requested by the DPRK [i.e., Democratic People's Republic of Korea] Government to reduce the humanitarian food programme and adjust the operating conditions agreed to in a Letter of Understanding concluded with the DPRK government in June 2008. Starting in June 2009, WFP is therefore refocusing its programme in 62 counties in six provinces instead of the 131 counties (eight provinces) originally targeted under the emergency operation. Depending on resources received, WFP will be able to feed up to 1.88 million North Koreans, mainly young children in institutions, pregnant and lactating women and the elderly. International staff numbers and monitoring is being proportionally reduced to 16 international staff (no Korean-speakers) and all but two (Chongjin and Wonsan) out of five field offices will be closed. Monitoring will now require advance notice of 7 days instead of 24 hours." World Food Program, "Korea, Democratic People's Republic (DPRK)," at http://www.wfp.org/countries/korea-democratic-peoples
-republic-dprk (February 25, 2010).

[9]UNICEF provides immunization, nutrition, vitamin supplements and textbooks for North Korean children. See UNICEF, "At a Glance: Korea, Democratic People's Republic of," at http://www.unicef.org/infoby
country/korea.html (February 25, 2010).

[10]Bruce Klingner, "America's North Korea Policy: Adding Lanes to the Road," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2252, March 20, 2009, athttp://www.heritage.org/Research/AsiaandthePacific/bg2252.cfm.

[11]CNN, "North Korea Refuses to Abandon Nukes."

[12]Choe Sang-Hun, "N. Korea Said to Apologize Over Currency Changes," The New York Times, February 11, 2010, at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/12
/world/asia/12korea.html (February 25, 2010).

[13]CNN, "North Korea Refuses to Abandon Nukes."

[14]The U.S. government and the North Korean government reached an agreement in June 2008 wherein the U.S. would donate 500,000 metric tons of food to North Korea, of which 80 percent would be distributed by WFP and 20 percent by non-governmental organizations. BBC, "North Korea Refuses U.S. Food Aid," March 18, 2009, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific
/7949785.stm (February 25, 2010).

[15]CNN, "North Korea Refuses to Abandon Nukes."

[16]See The Chosun Ilbo, "S. Korea Knew Its Rice Feeds N. Korean Military," updated February 14, 2008, at http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news
/200802/200802140010.html (February 25, 2010); The Chosun Ilbo, "Seoul May Resume Fertilizer Aid to N. Korea," February 2, 2010, at http://english
.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/02/02/2010020200866.html (February 25, 2010).

[17]"United Nations Development Program: A Case Study of North Korea," Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, January 24, 2008, athttp://www.undp.org/dprk/docs/UNDP-senate-report.pdf (February 25, 2010).

[18]Miklos Nemeth, Chander M. Vasudev, and Mary Ann Wyrsch, "Confidential Report on United Nations Development Programme Activities in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea 1999-2007," United Nations Development Program, May 31, 2008, at http://www.undp.org
/dprk/docs/EIIRP_Final_Report_31%20May.pdf (February 25, 2010).

[19]Brett D. Schaefer, "Suspend UNDP Activities in North Korea, Again," Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 2387, April 8, 2009, athttp://www.heritage.org/research/internationalorganizations/wm2387.cfm.

[20]Editorial, "Return to Pyongyang: A Reform Lesson at the U.N., of All Places,"The Wall Street Journal, January 29, 2009, at http://online.wsj.com
/article/SB123318920435726765.html (February 25, 2010); KBS World Radio, "UNDP to Resume NK Projects in March," January 23, 2009, athttp://english.kbs.co.kr/news/newsview_sub.php?menu=8&key=2009012313(February 25, 2010).

[21]Xiong Tong, "UNDP Re-Launches Mission in DPRK," China View, September 30, 2009, at http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-09/30/
content_12136802.htm (February 25, 2010).

[22]Yonhap News, "UNDP to Resume Operations in North Korea in February," December 30, 2009, at http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2009/12
/30/38/0401000000AEN20091230002600325F.HTML (February 25, 2010).

[23]The seven projects are a sustainable rural energy development program, improved seed production for sustainable agriculture, strengthening of the food and agriculture information system, reduction of post-harvest losses for food security, small wind energy promotion, statistics for the Millennium Development Goals/quality of life report for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and support project for environment program. See United Nations Executive Board of the United Nations Development Program and of the United Nations Population Fund, "Proposed Measures for the Resumption of Programme Operations in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea."

U.S. Supports UN's Offer of Darfur Post to Gambari Despite NGOs' Questions

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 30 -- On making the new UN envoy to Darfur the Nigerian Ibrahim Gambari, previously UN envoy to Myanmar, it appears the fix is in. Even the U.S., said to have wanted a more strident human rights voice for the post, has reportedly given in. U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, asked Monday about Gambari to Darfur, said "we support the Secretary General."

Following Inner City Press' exclusive report earlier on Monday that Gambari had been offered the post by the UNand African Union, Inner City Press received confirmation that Gambari has already been requesting commitments to come serve with him in Dar fur.

Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, as he greeted Inner City Press, was told that iot had already published the Gambari to Darfur story. His reaction was, "How did you know?"

A top UN peacekeeping official said that the offer had been made - and Gambari has already started hiring -- but it "remains to be signed."

The UN Security Council is required to sign off on the appointment. Because the U.S., France and UK had opposed Rodolphe Adada's "soft" line on Khartoum in a closed door lunch with Ban Ki-moon, many including U.S.-based NGOs had assumed the U.S. would use its leverage at the UN to get a a stronger voice, less "aligned with dictators" as one NGO put it, to head the Darfur mission.

Susan Rice and team at stakeout, Gambari to Darfur not shown

Inner City Press sought to ask questions of Susan Rice at her rare stakeout session on Monday, but was not given the microphone by her spokesman. Later, Inner City Press posed to the spokesman four questions in writing, including a request to comment on Gambari to Darfur. By 7 p.m. no comment had been received.

Inner City Press asked Susan Rice for her and the U.S. Mission's view of Gambari to Darfur. "We support the Secretary General," she said. Since his Office has confirmed the job offer to Gambari, this means that Ms. Rice and the U.S. support Gambari, despite reservations being expressed by the Darfur focused NGOs which supported Barrack Obama. Watch this space.

WSJ: U.N. Reformer (Really)

April 1, 2008

More than one American has tried to make the United Nations live up to its original ideals -- Pat Moynihan, Jeane Kirkpatrick, John Bolton. We'd add to that distinguished list the name of Mark Wallace, an ambassador to the U.S. mission at Turtle Bay who resigned yesterday having tried for two years to make the U.N. a more transparent place.

Mr. Wallace's biggest contribution was exposing the fraud and corruption in U.N. Development Program operations in North Korea. In the wake of his investigation, the then-new Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, was shocked enough to order an external audit of all U.N. programs. It didn't take long for Mr. Ban to backtrack on the extent of his original order, but his subsequent probe of the UNDP in North Korea confirmed Mr. Wallace's findings, as did a Congressional investigation.

Along the way, Mr. Wallace faced hostility from bureaucrats who don't think the country that provides nearly a quarter of the U.N. budget should demand more accountability. The UNDP's shoddy oversight of its North Korea operations is rightly seen as a wake-up call for better governance throughout the U.N. system. Mr. Wallace has lobbied for making internal audits, now secret, available to all member states. He also wants the U.N. to make more information, especially on budgets, available to the general public. And he has pushed for a more effective Ethics Office and protection of whistleblowers.

His record is also a lesson to those American officials who think their obligation is merely to get along at these international institutions. Mr. Wallace was unpopular with certain high State Department officials, who didn't want to risk their engagement with Pyongyang over corruption. He's the one who had it right.