Dow and Pinochet Connections to UNA-USA, Questions for Tom Miller

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/una3usajobs051209.html

UNITED NATIONS, May 12 -- The UN Association of the USA is, of course, a venerable group, seeking to educate residents of the UN's "host country" on the benefits of the World Body. But where, some ask, is accountability? Last month at a UNA-USA event, participants were charged $10 to hear from two UN staffer members how to get a job at the UN.

When Inner City Press asked how this complied with the UN's statements that money is never requested in connection with a search for a UN job, the UN speakers said that UNA-USA would answer. But they have not. A staffer, at a human rights event earlier this month, said "that was a local chapter." But what is the answer?

Now, journalists at the UN including Inner City Press are asked to attend a "meet and greet" with UNA-USA's new president, replacing longstanding William Luers: Tom Miller, described as a former US Ambassador to Greece. But a cursory Google search finds a 2006 Irish Times article entitled "Watering down of EU regulations on chemicals proves power of lobbyists," which reported that

"the US ambassador in Greece, Thomas J Miller, met Dow Chemical executives 'to discuss how to engage the Greek government.' According to an internal State Department cable, the embassy 'advised them that they should activate their European industry colleagues' and 'identified appropriate Greek government officials for industry contact and explained how best to approach them based on their political and philosophical orientation.'"

While lobbying for US companies like Dow on how to "watered down EU regulations on chemicals" might be a plus in US diplomatic circles, how it plays in the realm of the UN remains to be seen. Then again, Miller's predecessor Luers was linked to the pro-Pinochet "Operation Condor," click here for that.

The post pays over $200,000 a year.

And when a journalist asked the UN to back up the statement, made in Washington in March, that the US owns over $1 billion to the UN, the spokesperson first said, come upstairs for the evidentiary support -- and then said, it's UNA-USA's number. These are the questions for Mr. Miller, this week and going forward. And this, some advice that UNA-USA, which doubles as the "Business Council for the UN," offers online:

Once a supplier has researched the United Nations market and has identified the agency or agencies with which it wishes to conduct business, it must commit itself to establishing long-term relationships with U.N. officials and procurement officers at an agency's headquarters and field offices. Frequently, these relationships provide valuable additional information to suppliers about upcoming contracts, technical specifications for these contracts, and existing competition for a contract award that would not otherwise be available.

While there does not yet exist a public advertising system that notifies suppliers of all or most upcoming contracts throughout the U.N. system, individual agencies increasingly rely on their websites to publicize contracts. Nevertheless, there is no substitute for personal relationships with procurement officers, who can provide added insight to the procurement process.

This does not seem to be the sort of policy the UN should be recommending. Watch this site.

And see, www.innercitypress.com/una3usajobs051209.html

At UN, Protests to Corporate Control of Water, As Trial Lawyers Take an Interest in Kabul

Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at UN
www.innercitypress.com/un2corp032408.html

UNITED NATIONS, March 24 -- While the UN talks of water, corporations with juice enter the building to write their own rules. This is the distillation of a protest letter some 125 non-governmental organizations have sent to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. On Monday at UN Headquarters, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesperson about the letter, which asked Ban "to withdraw from something called the CEO Water Mandate, claiming that it's run by corporations and it's just an excuse for exploitation of water resources.. Did he receive it and if so, what then?"

The spokesperson answered, "I don't have the letter at this point." Click here for transcript. Later in the day, Inner City Press was e-mailed a notice that the letter had been received. Later still, a paragraph was inserted into the transcript:

"The Spokesperson later added that the letter had been received and, according to the United Nations Global Compact Office, the Mandate's purpose is to provide a platform for companies and stakeholders to share knowledge and emerging practices with respect to water stewardship and sustainability. Regarding a 5 March event, which the letter reportedly alleges was a meeting between corporations and their allies to map out their plan of action for the CEO Water Mandate, the Global Compact Office notes that the learning-and-dialogue session brought companies together with a range of stakeholders, including non-business attendees and representatives from various United Nations agencies. The Spokesperson added that the Global Compact Office has said, 'The UN Global Compact Office has long recognized and stated that voluntary initiatives cannot be a substitute for regulation or government action. Rather, the two are complementary, with voluntary platforms such as The CEO Water Mandate providing a space for learning and innovation.'"

But, the activists question, innovation in what? Spin? As Inner City Press previously reported from the UN, Coca-Cola's purported exoneration in India was in a study which Coke itself funded. At Dow Chemical's last appearance at the UN, also on the issue of water, non-violent protesters were hustled off the UN's grounds, and the press told not to cover it -- click here for that story, and compare to Monday's affirmative answer by the UN Spokesperson's to Inner City Press' question if it is "the UN's position that people have a right to protest right in front of the UN building without being arrested." The UN's blithe partnership with corporations continues apace, with its Global Compact rebuffing in this case a letter from more than 100 NGOs from all over the world, without the UN spokesperson, even in a canned response belatedly-added to the briefing transcript, identifying the "non-business attendees" of the meeting alluded to. The Global Compact says, "Non-business attendees included: World Wildlife Fund, The Nature Conservancy, Plan Malawi, the Pacific Institute, as well as the following UN agencies: UNICEF, UNDP, UNEP, UN OHCHR, and UNESCO. A summary of the working conference will be available in early April." We'll be waiting...

A more directly political "public-private partnership" recently on display at the UN was last week's session in the Dag Hammarskjold Library auditorium about the "Partnership for Justice Reform in Afghanistan," followed by a reception sponsored by the Arent Fox and Bingham law firms, and "Quinn Emanuel Trial Lawyers." This last is ironic or surprising, given that the event was sponsored and promoted by the U.S. Department of State, in an administration which loudly castigates trial lawyers. But, hey, they're a business too...

And see, www.innercitypress.com/un2corp032408.html