Rumors that members of the G-77 may move to nominate Singapore’s former prime minister Goh Chok Tong during the group’s meeting next week in New York prompted quick responses from both Thailand and Singapore yesterday.

Thai Foreign Minister Kantathi Suphamongkhon said… “What is clear is that Thailand’s candidate is backed by Asean and we will move ahead with that,” he said in a telephone interview with the media from Washington where he is on an official visit to the US.

Likewise, the Singapore foreign ministry issued reassurances that Thai UNSG candidate Surakiart Sathirathai continued to have the full support of the Singapore government.

Singapore’s Foreign Ministry stated categorically on Wednesday that the Singapore government supports Thai Deputy Prime Minister Surakiat Sathirathai’s candidature for the post of the next United Nations Secretary General. It said the government formally expressed its support in writing for Mr Surakiat’s candidature in August 2004. And in September 2004, Singapore joined other ASEAN countries in endorsing his candidature at the informal ASEAN Ministerial Meeting in New York.

A nomination with the backing of the G-77 – which now includes 133 member governments, including all 10 members of ASEAN – is not likely. The organization will tread softly, perhaps taking the same path as the Non-Aligned Movement in firmly committing to an Asian nominee but not restricting its members to vote for a particular candidate. However, if a significant number of G-77 members merely encourage Goh to enter the race, Surakiart’s chances would be furthered strained than they are now.

Welcome to readers clicking over from the Washington Post’s new PostGlobal feature. PostGlobal highlighted UNSG.org this week as part of its “experiment in global, collaborative journalism” to engage new writers and journalists on global issues beyond the headlines.    

Close observers of the U.S. foreign policy team will not be surprised if Ambassador John Bolton brings up the selection of the next UNSG when he next speaks before the U.S. Congress. President Bush’s revelation yesterday that the United States is “really looking in the Far East right now [for someone] to be the secretary-general” could trigger Bolton’s penchant for running to Congress when the Adminstration tries to rope him into a position he doesn’t particularly approve of. Bolton’s principal contribution to the discussion thus far has been his frequently stated view that Eastern Europe deserves a “turn” at the post.

If Bush’s focus is indeed on the Far East, that may signal the government’s interest in either Ban (more likely) or Surakiart (less likely) over Dhanapala and Tharoor. With all due respect, however, this presumes a clear differentiation in Bush’s mind of the diverse regions within Asia (which in UN terms, extends from Jordan to Japan). When asked about the long-rumored potential candidacy of Prince Zeid from Jordan, Bush seemed surprised, but responded that he would not be opposed to a moderate Muslim as UNSG.

“So this is the first I`ve heard of this suggestion [Zeid as a candidate]. And you`ll find that we will work closely with friends and allies to come up with the best candidate, but we won`t be committing publicly, like you`re trying to get me to do,” Bush said stressing that he will not be against a Muslim candidate.

“Not at all, would not be against a Muslim. The criterion I`m for is somebody who wants to spread liberty and enhance the peace, do difficult things like confront tyranny, worry about the human condition, blow the whistle on human rights violations,” he said.

Beyond the rhetoric, a moderate Muslim as UNSG could advance U.S. interests in repairing its image across the world, as was suggested by Steve Clemons several months ago. Whether this is Zeid or perhaps a candidate from a “Far East” Muslim nation such as Indonesia, Malaysia or Bangladesh makes this more than an interesting hypothetical angle. China’s continued discontent with the existing field of candidates but insistence on an Asian nominee only further encourages discussion of possible Muslim candidates.

But the candidacy of a Muslim Arab would be particularly intriguing in how the United Nations and, in its reaction, the United States are perceived in the Arab world. Likewise, the nomination of an Arab candidate will draw attention to Arab governments as global actors.

After the Iraq war, the Arab public has viewed the United Nation as an organization which is powerless and lacks the will and muscle to control world affairs in general and the interests of Arab states in particular. Given this scenario, the nomination of an Arab for the post of UN secretary-general can send the right message to the Arab region. This can also herald a paradigm shift in the way Arab states envisage their role in multilateral institutions.

Notwithstanding the nominal independence of the office, a moderate Muslim as UNSG could encourage greater Arab engagement in institutions such as the International Criminal Court and bring attention to their contributions in development and humanitarian efforts. Successful efforts would feedback into Western perceptions of more culturally, politically diverse societies in the Arab and predominantly Muslim countries.  

Despite Bolton’s convictions, the U.S. appears ready to get behind an Asian nominee and could benefit from the region’s vast expanse as to how that is defined. So, the question to raise becomes, where is China on this?

For China, what does “Asian” mean?

The Security Council Report (SCR) has provided a further analysis of this month’s process following Ambassador de La Sablière‘s briefing last Wednesday. It looks at the letter submitted de La Sablière to UNGA President Jan Eliasson and notes several differences from the previously discussed “Wisnumurti Guidelines” (from 1996) and some of the initial interpretations of de La Sablière’s announcement.

The formal decision that candidates must be nominated by a member state will upset the commonly held wisdom that a dark horse will steal the nomination from those publicly known in advance. This should appease Canada, India and other middle powers concerned about the General Assembly’s inability to properly evaluate the Security Council nominee. 

However, the logistics of the voting will, while pushing the process in an overall positive direction, obscure each candidate’s level of support among the permanent members where it counts most. The decision to allow member states to abstain from indicating their support may allow second- and third-choice candidates to survive the initial rounds, but will also allow permanent members to mask their true preferences. The polling will be further complicated by the decision not to differentiate – as in the Wisnumurti Guidelines – between permanent and elected members in the voting. This will hide from the candidates the true political value of their vote tally.

That the candidates will be told their vote tallies and the tallies of the highest and lowest vote getters is a encouraging reform, but likely merely a response by the Council to the number of openly campaigning Asian candidates. In SCR’s consideration,

“…such an approach is most likely to contribute to a voluntary narrowing of the field. The indicative scores, given privately to candidates, along with the anonymous “highest” and “lowest” scores, are likely to show candidates if they have any realistic chance of success.”

The vote tallies will not officially be made public, but with a small number of candidates, it will probably not be too difficult for the sponsoring governments to interpret where their candidates fell in the ranking.

Pakistan continues to have difficulty finding someone willing to be its nationalist champion against India’s Shashi Tharoor.

It’s latest candidate-to-be-named, Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi, has not yet received the reassurances that Islamabad would provide her the necessary support to effectively challenge Tharoor for the post of UNSG. Tharoor was formally nominated as a candidate on Thursday and has begun his campaign in Africa.

To date, Pakistan has leaked the names of four officials who were being considered.

• Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz – would prefer to stay on as Prime Minister until 2012. (Maybe he’ll challenge Ramos-Horta?)
• UN Ambassador Munir Akram – does not want to give up his seat at the UN just yet
• Former UNFPA Director Dr. Nafis Sadik – has told friends she has no interest in the post
• Ambassador to the UK Maleeha Lodhi – ??

Lodhi’s name was raised as a possibility after, one by one, the others declined the honor and after it was reported that Pakistan had given up and would instead back one of Tharoor’s current challengers.

Considering the difficulty Pakistan is having with finding one of its own to challenge Tharoor, the government might want to revisit that option.

Unless the political winds turn sharply against him at home, it appears that Jose Ramos-Horta has dropped out of the race for UNSG this year. But that does not mean he doesn’t see himself in the post eventually.

Ramos-Horta’s political capital is still quite high following the shake-up of the Timor-Leste government, prompting the ruling Fretilin Party to include him on the “short list” of candidates for Prime Minister.

Mr Ramos Horta said he would be prepared to serve beyond 2007 – potentially running for president – but ruled himself out of the race to become the next United Nations secretary-general for which he has been mentioned.

…

“I can wait five years if I am really interested in the job in 2012. I would be interested in that,” he said.

“What notice would be taken of the secretary-general if I abandoned my own country in its time of need?”

Presuming a continuation of the regional rotation practice and the UNSG’s traditional two terms, it will still be “Asia’s turn” in 2012. But, as in 1996, the region’s turn does not necessarily correspond with the officerholder’s period of service. If Ramos-Horta, who was reportedly on the U.S. shortlist this year, does decide to challenge the Asian incumbent in five years, the intra-regional rivalies this year may be only a preview of the race in 2011.

Update: Ramos-Horta has been chosen as the new Prime Minister of Timor-Leste. He will serve until parliamentary elections are held in 2007.

Ambassador de La Sablière described to the press yesterday the approach which the Security Council will follow in narrowing the list of candidates for UNSG.

As in previous selections, the use of “white votes” or, in English, “straw votes”, will be used to identify the general level of support various candidates have at this point.

“…the white votes are not eliminatory; they have simply an indicative value. This is why each delegation will be asked to say if it encourages, if it discourages or possibly if it does not wish to express an opinion on a candidate.   

The white votes meet two aims. It is necessary that the candidates can measure the support which they have. The results are communicated to them and they can, possibly, infer some of the consequences; [and] it is necessary to facilitate the formation of an agreement within the Security Council. It is a question of avoiding situations of blocking [of candidates later].” 

It is appropriate to review in this context some of the factors that make this year’s selection unprecedented.

1. We have an actual “field” of viable candidates, publicly announcing their interest in the position and actively campaigning for it.
2. The Security Council has formally limited itself to considering candidates formally (i.e. publicly) nominated by governments. While this may not prevent a November surprise entirely, it makes it much less likely.
3. That the candidates will be formally notified of the straw vote’s results seems to me unprecedented, but perhaps only in context of the previous two points. Despite Ambassador de La Sablière’s emphasis on the non-elimination role of the vote(s), no doubt the candidates will have a more firm sense of their competitors’ support, and react accordingly. 

As noted here last week, all of this will not take place however until later in the month. No official date has been set, and the vote may very well not be announced until after it occurs. A critical look at the candidates’ campaign trips will be telling, and will be the subject of a new initiative on this site in the coming week.

For a few months, another Asian name – Ashraf Ghani, chancellor of Kabul University and former finance minister of Afghanistan – has been among those contemplated as a possible candidate, but with little discussion in the media or among many close observers. However, with the list of Asian candidates growing daily it seems, he may find himself being discussed as one of several “sleeper candidates” yet to announce.

One report from March cites an official of Kabul University suggesting that Ghani had been “told informally by the UN secretary-general’s office that he is a contender to succeed Annan.” In all likelihood, such a comment (if it were made at all!) was simply reflecting media reports and speculation. 

Scandavanian blogger Draco considers Ghani “the best looking” of the Asian nominees out there, pointing out Ghani’s grasp of development and security issues as key to his possible selection.

Understanding the challenge of the convergence of security and development will be essential for any coming UN Secretary General. Without knowledge of both development and security in practice (and, as Ghani has, also preferrably in theory) there is less of a chance that the UNSG will succeed. The next UNSG will have to deal with development as much as geopolitics — and the other way around. Since most stakeholders seem to focus on either side of the coin diplomatic skills and a sense of urgency for either agenda, and their converging trend, is utterly important.

Ghani, if he could secure a nomination, would be one more on the list of nominees and possible nominees from Sri Lanka, Thailand, South Korea, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Singapore and Malaysia (whew!). Whether Ghani, a celebrity at the World Bank and lauded for his economic leadership in post-Taliban Afghanistan, can secure a nomination from the Afghan government from which he was reportedly oustered for political reasons, remains to be seen.

The race for UNSG has begun to seep further out into public view in the past week. The news magazine Newsweek belatedly realized the campaign was on last week with an article subtitled “The race to succeed Kofi Annan has begun.” The progressive magazine Mother Jones‘ MoJoBlog tried to catch its readers up to speed, noting for its readers that “the battle to replace him has been raging for months.”

Perhaps the candidates’ recent public appearances finally attracted attention beyond the usual observers. Ban Ki Moon spoke before the Council on Foreign Relations at the end of May about the need for accountability in the UN system. Just two weeks ago, Jayantha Dhanapala spoke before International Peace Academy about the importance of multilaterialism. Both engagements clearly were intended as campaign speechs, and represented a shift in how willing candidates for the top post are approaching the otherwise secretive and politicized selection process.

The three declared candidates, Ban, Dhanapala and Sathirathai, are already making public appearances around the world—effectively campaigning. This has led some U.N. watchers to believe the Security Council’s power has already waned. “They’ll have to be more accountable for their decision because the public knows about [the candidates],” says Ayca Ariyoruk of the United Nations Association of the United States.

A friend at the Canadian mission pointed out how Dhanapala and Ban’s public appearances are implementing, if informally, a key Canadian proposal to open up the selection to greater transparency. The proposal, one of five reforms promoted by the Canadian government, calls for forums which would allow governments an opportunity to meet and learn more about the candidates and their views, more or less a “screening process,” currently absent from the selection process. But, in his view, these candidate-led appearances will demonstrate a level of utility and credibility that will encourage them to be formally incorporated into the selection process the next time around. 

With the Security Council expected to move forward in July on the selection of the next UNSG, all eyes will be on France as it assumes the Council presidency next week. And they are not wasting any time.

A source noted that the French ambassador will be holding a discussion at 4:00 p.m. tomorrow (Friday, 30 June) specifically on the guidelines that will be used in the selection process. It had yet to be determined today whether a press release or other advisory on the discussion’s outcome would be released afterwards.

Don’t expect much the first two weeks. The more important actions are not expected to occur until the second half of the month. The guidelines are not expected to include nor will France suggest any formal deadline by which the nominees must come forward. (Officially, there are at the moment only two candidates – Sri Lanka’s Jayantha Dhanapala and Thailand’s Surakiart Sathirathai. India and South Korea have yet to formally convey their nominations to the President of the Security Council.)

Oh, and on Chirac seeking the job himself? According to the source, “That is amusing. Though he has a love for Japan, I don’t think that qualifies him as Asian.”

Update: from the UN Journal… France will hold a press briefing on the work for July on Wednesday, 5 July 2006, following the adjournment of the consultations of the whole.

Last January, Sportsbooks.com posted odds on candidates for the next UNSG. While an amusing exercise, it’s doubtful an accurate measure of the campaigns. Nonetheless, a regular reader (thanks, dracobs!) commented that an updated look at the odds might be of interest.

Interestingly, neither Ban nor Dhanapala made the list in January, despite existing widespread expectations that they would be candidates and now being frontrunners.

Clinton and Kwasniewski both dropped significantly in their chances of getting appointed, according to Sportsbook.

The only gainer is former Deputy Premier Anwar Ibrahim of Malaysia, who has been approached and asked to run, but has not yet decided.

Though it was issued prior to Shashi Tharoor‘s nomination and the increased attention to other Asian “sleeper candidates” such as Anwar, Foreign Policy played oddsmaker itself a few weeks ago.

(Sadly, Aung San Suu Kyi did not make FP’s list. But perhaps that has something to do with the UN’s member states inability to negotiate her release from house arrest in Burma, let alone give her a job in New York?)

Whichever odds you go with, the Security Council is expected to come up with its short list by the end of July, so now might be the time to get your bets in. As Alex Czajkowski, Marketing Director with Sportsbook.com points out,

“Everybody bets, so, with Clinton moving down in the odds and the race now wide open, it’s a great time to gamble on who is most likely to lead the UN
into the next decade.”