I paraphrase, but former UN weapons inspector Hans Blix (now a private citizen) suggests that the international community apply the same diplomatic strategy that worked with North Korean to Iran. That is, offer Iran a security guarantee and extend the promise of normalized relations in exchange for the verifiable dismantling of Iran's uranium enrichment program. He also suggested that the international community work toward a uranium enrichment and plutonium production freeze in the Middle East.

"The powers negotiating ... are willing to give North Korea a guarantee ... both against attack from abroad and, implicit in that, a guarantee against regime change," he said.

North Korea was also offered normalization of relations with Japan and the U.S.

"These two elements have not been tried to my knowledge in the case of Iran," Blix said.

[snip]

"They would commit themselves for some period of time not to build enrichment plants, so Iran would not be alone ... the others would be there as well," Blix said.

"It would also mean Israel, that has (plutonium-based) nuclear weapons, would not produce more plutonium, could not make more bombs on the basis of that plutonium," he said.

Sound advice from someone who has a proven track record on these issues. Unlike, say, folks at the Weekly Standard.

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) is providing assistance to thousands of victims of a cholera outbreak in northern Iraq.

Yesterday the World Health Organization (WHO), which is leading the UN response to the outbreak, reported that Sulemaniyah governorate experienced close to 5,000 cases since 10 August, with 10 deaths reported and 51 confirmed cases in Kirkuk. Two hospitals in the stricken governorate also reported treating 2,000 diarrhoea cases.

More

In a report out today, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirms that, as expected, Iran's progress on uranium enrichment and plutonium production is moving along sluggishly. Further, it seems that some in the Iranian ruling elite are doubting the political utility of pursuing the nuclear program full steam a head. From the AP:

...while Iran continued to expand its uranium enrichment program, it was doing so much more slowly than expected, and had produced only negligible amounts of nuclear fuel that was far below the level usable for nuclear warheads.

One of the U.N. officials also noted that construction of the plutonium-producing reactor at the city of Arak had slowed in recent months.

He said that "design difficulties, getting equipment, materials and components, and fuel technology, plus perhaps some political considerations," could be causing the delay.

The allusion to "political considerations" appeared linked to reports that Iranian officials might be considering stopping construction of the Arak reactor in another sign of good will calculated to blunt the threat of new U.N. sanctions.

Citing unidentified Iranian sources, Jane's Defense Weekly earlier this week said some members of Iran's Supreme National Security Council were pushing for such a move.

Remember this little nugget the next time the war chorus heaps scorn on the diplomatic process and urges a swift military confrontation. There is still plenty of time for diplomacy to work. That is, as long as we want it to work.

The United Nations envoy to Liberia has called for an end to violence against women, stressing the importance of security.

Special Representative of the Secretary-General Alan Doss remarked yesterday, "It does not matter where you are in Liberia, your security is important. River Gee County may be a long way from Monrovia but you are not forgotten."

More

The United Nations High Commission on Refugees just announced that Goodwill Ambassador Angelina Jolie traveled to Iraq and Syria yesterday to visit Iraqis displaced by violence.

The Iraq refugee crisis is perhaps one of the most underreported stories from Iraq. UNHCR--the main international body looking out for the interests of the displaced--has estimated that over 4 million Iraqi's have been displaced by fighting, half of whom have fled to neighboring Syria and Jordan. Good on Angelina Jolie to take the personal risk to travel to Iraq to draw attention to their plight.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon he will be traveling to Sudan next week, to check on the peace progress in Darfur.

Mr. Ban told a press conference at UN Headquarters that he is visiting Sudan and some of its neighbours "to go and see for myself the very difficult conditions" under which the hybrid UN-African Union peacekeeping force will operate in Darfur from the start of next year.

More

The Security Council is one step closer toward authorizing a civilian protection force in eastern Chad and northern Central African Republic. Yesterday, the council unanimously affirmed a proposal to let the European Union send forces to protect refugees in Chad and the Central African Republic, where some 400,000 people have fled to avoid conflict in Darfur. The mission will not be a traditional peacekeeping mission per se, but will incorporate UN civilian experts and UN police units. The EU troops would be stationed in and around the camps.

The need for such a force is undeniable. For the host countries, the masses of displaced people are a source of political instability. And for those living in the camps, protection is needed from predatory militia that attack on men and women who venture beyond the camp to find fuel and water for their families. The European Union--led by France--has stepped up and taken on this responsibility. I would think this deserves some praise and recognition.

A United Nations-backed climate change meeting--drawing 1,000 representatives from over 150 governments, business, environmental organizations and research institutions--kicked off in Vienna yesterday, in preparation for a global summit in Bali.

The summit, scheduled to take place from 3 to 14 December in Bali, Indonesia, aims to determine future action on mitigation, adaptation, the global carbon market and financing responses to climate change for the period after the expiry of the Kyoto Protocol – the current global framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions – in 2012.

More

Over 1,000 delegates from more than 100 industrialized countries are meeting in Vienna this week to discuss climate change strategies beyond the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012. The idea is to bring together Kyoto signatories with holdouts from key industrial states to see how much buy-in there is for broader climate change efforts among the major polluters. Nothing concrete is expected to come from this meeting, but it will test the waters before a major climate change summit in Bali, Indonesia this December. "The coming week will give us an indication of whether the political community...is willing to move beyond well-intentioned platitudes towards real negotiations," says Yvo de Boer, the U.N.'s top climate change official.

That's UN code for: "In the next few days, we will know weather or not the non-Kyoto signatory states--namely China and the United States—are serious about emissions reduction."

For those interested in the future of our planet, all eyes should be on Vienna this week.

More than 180 young people from 85 different countries will meet in Germany next week to discuss the ways in which technology can be used to promote environmental protection.

UN Environment Programme (UNEP) Executive Director Achim Steiner said, "Our hope is that on the basis of discussions at this Conference, 180 young people will return to their communities and nations and become beacons of activities and also motivators for many others to play a part in addressing environmental challenges."

More

Koïchiro Matsuura, Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) marked the International Day for the Remembrance of the Slave Trade and its Abolition by reflecting on slavery's "tragic past" while noting that its modern forms still cause worldwide suffering.

Matsuura said it "serves to pay tribute to all those who worked collectively and individually to trigger the irreversible process of the abolition of the slave trade and slavery throughout the world."

More

UNESCO is joining the United Nations in their effort to aid those affected by the August 15 earthquake in Peru which left some 500 people dead.

UNESCO will provide assistance to Peru's Ministry of Education to assess the situation of schools in communities stricken by the earthquake, also working with the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF).

More

There are 830 Unesco World Heritage sites around the world, so designated for their "outstanding value to humanity." These sites include natural marvels like Yellowstone National Park and cultural landmarks like the Taj Mahal.

Once Unesco designates something a World Heritage site, it is up to each country to take the necessary measures to protect it. And as this Conde Nast Traveler piece shows, not all countries treat their wonders with equal respect. So, Traveler reports, Unesco has started taking the unusual step of de-designating sites that have been unneccesarily molested.

The idea is that designating something a World Heritage site helps boost tourism to the area. But Unesco has no desire to see a gaudy hotel complex sit atop breathtaking natural beauty. By starting to de-designate sites, Unesco is hoping to promote sustainable tourism. Sounds logical to me.

The new French Ambassador to the UN has circulated a draft Security Council "statement" affirming the council's readiness to approve an EU-led mission to protect refugee camps in Chad and the Central African Republic. (A "statement" is a non-binding expression of Security Council unity on a particular topic. It is typically of symbolic value, but in this case it will pave the way for a Security Council resolution sanctioning an international military operation in Chad and CAR.)

The French draft proposes an EU military force of some 3,000 deploy to refugee camps in eastern Chad and northern CAR, where an estimated 800,000 Darfuri refugees and internally displaced live. The deployment would be supported by a smaller number of UN police and Chad police.

It would not be an official peacekeeping mission, as the troops would be under EU command and not blue helmets. But -- and here is the kicker -- in all likelihood, if this proposal goes forward it will likely turn into a traditional peacekeeping operation when the original mandate expires in a year. When that happens, the international community better be ready to commit the financial resources to sustain yet another peacekeeping operation in the Greater Horn of Africa.

The proposed operation is part of a massive expansion of peacekeeping in the region. It would be the western-most outpost of a series of peacekeeping missions stretching to the Indian Ocean, including Darfur (if that gets off the ground), Southern Sudan, the Ethiopian-Eritrean border, and a UN supported AU force in Somalia. (The last time there was a similar cluster of peacekeeping operations was a decade ago, when UN peacekeepers were deployed to Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Cote D'Ivoire.)

Obviously, this presents huge challenges to the UN and its member states. Peacekeeping is already on the verge of a potential resource crunch. If the Security Council wants to replicate the success experienced in places like Sierra Leone and Liberia, wealthier member states must step up and back the new east African missions. The alternative would be letting conflicts continue to fester in the Horn of Africa.

The first all-female peacekeeping unit in Liberia was lauded by the top UN envoy to the country.

Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Alan Doss, congratulated the women for their work, noting "Though a new beginning for gender equality in peacekeeping, this deployment is a continuation of India’s consistent commitment to peacekeeping operations...This ceremony is not only about gender equality. It is about performance. You have all performed your duties well and met our high expectations."

More

The UN General Secretariat is going green. And a Business Week peek into the renovation plans for the ageing UN headquarters in New York says the building will be a "model of UN efficiency."

When completed in April, 2014, the U.N. will look as it does today from the outside. Or, as [project manager Michael] Adlerstein puts it, "Ten years from now, there will be no way to tell that the U.N. was renovated unless you look at the energy bill." While refusing to disclose specific details of that bill, officials claim that the new plans aim for a 30% reduction of energy use. And green is a sustaining principle of the whole redesign.

On June 5, Secretary General Ban Ki Moon announced that he would like the new HQ to "become a globally acclaimed model of efficient use of energy and resources." As such, he's earmarked $28 million of the budget to ensure green principles are applied. Proposed initiatives include energy-efficient light fixtures, room sensors that turn off lights if a room isn't occupied, and solar energy systems.

The interior of the Secretariat building will be redesigned with more open space to exploit the natural light that comes through the glass façade. Officials say they are aiming for, at the very least, a LEED Silver rating. LEED is a system run by the U.S. Green Building Council to judge buildings for energy efficiency.

Ban has made action on climate change an early priority of his administration. And forgive the pun, but it is heartening to see the UN, er, LEED by example. In all seriousness though, it is often said that the only power a UN Secretary General wields is the power of the pulpit. Kofi Annan used this power to advance a global human rights agenda. And though he has only been in office for eight months, it is clear that Ban ki Moon is endeavoring to make climate change his signature issue.

The United Nations has granted $8.7 million to help the ongoing humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan in the wake of devastating floods.

"Emergency Relief Coordinator John Holmes announced that he had approved the grant, which will be allocated among 11 relief projects across Sudan, where torrential rainfall has destroyed or seriously damaged more than 30,000 homes and inundated towns, villages and farmlands."

Approximately 150,000 people are homeless from the floods.

More

Since a Russian submarine planted a flag 13,000 feet underneath the North Pole twelve days ago there has been a new scramble (of sorts) for the Arctic. Denmark sent two ice breakers to survey its potential claims; the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration just announced a new mission to map part of the Arctic near Alaska; and at a North American summit in Ottawa today, the Canadian prime minister is expected to assert Canada's territorial claim over the Northwest Passage.

Fortunately, there is a forum for resolving territorial disputes in the Arctic. So, like Scott Paul says, a "new Cold War" this isn't. Here is how it works. Common international maritime law stipulates that each country's territory stretches 200 nautical miles off shore. This means that most of the outer ring of the Arctic Circle is neatly divided by Canada, Russia, Norway, the United States, and Denmark (which controls Greenland). It is the inner ring, however, where the confusion -- and competition -- arises.

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (Unclos) Arctic countries can lay claim to the seabed beyond 200 nautical miles if that seabed is an extension of their continental shelf. A panel of 21 geologists and scientists that sit on a body called the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Self reviews and certifies these claims.

Flag planting has zero standing under international law. It is geology that dictates claims. So if Russia wants to make an internationally recognized claim it must send supporting scientific data to the Commission. Unfortunately, while Russia can take advantage of the rights afforded to it under Unclos, the United States cannot. This is because the United States senate has not yet ratified the treaty. So all the mineral wealth that is believed to be hiding underneath the inner ring of the Artic Circle may be beyond the reach of American petroleum companies.

There is, however, a great deal of domestic support for ratification. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is unanimously in favor of the treaty--as is the president. They are joined by an unlikely coalition of environmental groups, oil companies and the military. All that stands in the way of ratification is 1) senate scheduling 2) a small number of senators who still subscribe to what we may call the "Frank Gaffney worldview" in which Unclos cedes, rather than affirms American sovereignty. But under pressure from both the White House, military, and various interest groups opposition to the treaty from the knee-jerk anti-UN wing of congress is dwindling.

Koïchiro Matsuura, Director-General of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), issued a statement on the murder of journalist Adnane al-Safi.

"The murder of Adnane al-Safi strikes yet another blow against peace and democracy in Iraq...His killers stand condemned in the eyes of the world, and I call upon the authorities in Iraq to do their utmost to bring those responsible to justice."

Some 40 media professionals have been killed this year alone in Iraq.

More

The Washington Institute on Near East Policy just released a very even-handed assessment of the peacekeeping force deployed to Lebanon following a ceasefire brokered through the Security Council one year ago this week.

The post-2006 UNIFIL is regarded as more robust than its predecessor, with units that include tanks as well as armored fighting vehicles. It also has ships in a maritime task force working in collaboration with the Lebanese navy. UN Security Council Resolution 1701 authorizes "all necessary action in areas of deployment of [UNIFIL's] forces," qualifying this by also stating "as it deems within its capabilities."

Both Israeli and UN officials have reported that weapons are being smuggled to Hizballah across the border from Syria, although not in UNIFIL's area of operations below the Litani river in the south.

According to the report, Unifil's single greatest challenge is maintaining a visible presence and cordial relationship with the local population, despite the understandable urge to scale back patrols following a suicide car bombing that killed six peacekeepers two months ago.

Some UNIFIL officers favor adopting a more population-centric approach, working to build up personal relationships with the villagers of southern Lebanon and even local Hizballah representatives. Others seem content to simply wait out the rest of their tours in southern Lebanon behind the razor-wire fences encircling their bases.

At the root of the problem is UNIFIL's greatest strength -- the fact that it comprises soldiers from so many different countries...The different contingents do not just vary in training and equipment, but also in the way they conduct themselves within their own sectors..

Success in Southern Lebanon is not a foregone conclusion. There is growing concern, for example, that Unifil may be targeted in the future, possibly to intimidate the international community as the Lebanese Special Tribunal gets off the ground. Still, it is worth recalling that just one year ago a barrage of rockets rained down on northern Israel while thousands of Lebanese civilians became displaced by Israeli bombing. But through diplomacy at the UN, catastrophe was contained.

The UN Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT), which promotes socially and environmentally sustainable housing, has launched a new worldwide alliance with water operators to improve to clean water and basic sanitation.

The new Global Water Operators Partnership Alliance is designed to strengthen the capacities of the public water operators that provide more than 90 per cent of water and sanitation services in developing nations.

More

According to press reports the Dutch government is putting the final touches on a memorandum of understanding with the United Nations over hosting the Lebanese Special Tribunal. The only thing that needs to be resolved, says the Dutch government, is an agreement by a second country to imprison people convicted by the tribunal, which will try those responsible for a wave of political assassinations in Lebanon, including the 2005 car bombing that killed Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

The tribunal's precise location in Holland is still being decided. One option may be the facilities of the International Criminal Court, which are being used by the Special Court for Sierra Leone's trial of former Liberian President Charles Taylor. (Like the Taylor trial, if the Lebanese Tribunal is held at the ICC the tribunal will operate under its own rules, not those of the ICC.)

It deserves mentioning that both the Hariri tribunal and the Special Court for Sierra Leone were created by the Security Council with strong American backing. The ICC is an independent institution that does not enjoy American support. But by hosting the Taylor trial--and potentially holding the Hariri Tribunal--the ICC may be tacitly showing skeptics that it can, in fact, be a useful institution to support.

One month after floods devastated Bangladesh, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) is still providing food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities and shelter to those affected.

UNICEF has also deployed 10 mobile water treatment plants for communities needing safe water in concert with the country’s Department of Public Health and Engineering.

The agency said in its latest update, released yesterday, that deaths resulting from diarrhoea have been avoided to date – despite 15,000 reported cases – thanks to the availability of oral rehydration salts to treat dehydration.

More

I just came across Steven Levitt's Freakonomics post from Monday suggesting that man-made tornadoes or some other silver bullet will likely be the cure for climate change; we needn't fret. His reasoning:

Technology and human ingenuity have solved just about every problem we’ve faced so far; there is no obvious reason why global warming shouldn’t succumb as well.

"Just about" is a little generous. The world still suffers under a host of diseases, inter- and intra-state conflicts, and nature's hardships, none of which we can reasonably expect to tame through technology or human ingenuity in the near future. The human race has, without a doubt, achieved remarkable progress, but the idea that we have, for the most part, subdued nature (human or otherwise) is way off the mark.

Moreover, just because we've demonstrated the ability to overcome major roadblocks in the past, it doesn't follow that we can expect to be handed the easy solution in this instance. The dinosaurs also managed to survive every roadblock until they met the one they couldn't.

Levitt's post may seem like a harmless one-off showcasing a quirky idea, but there is a real danger in underestimating the scope of the effects of climate change or relying too heavily on a silver bullet. The risks associated with not appropriately stepping up to the plate are unparalleled in scope and impact. (The IPCC's reports have sobering on this point.) And, any comprehensive solution would have to be massive in scope and absurdly quick in development. According to the Scientific Experts Group on Climate Change and Sustainable Development, unless we level off greenhouse gas emissions by 2015 and cut them by two-thirds by 2100, we risk crossing a global "tipping-point," which "could lead to intolerable impacts on human well-being, in spite of all feasible attempts at adaptation." Does Levitt actually believe that any one technological solution powerful enough to shift the climate of our planet can be developed on so short a time frame?

To be sure, technology and human ingenuity will be absolutely necessary for mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change. But, more than a mythical silver bullet, we will need to build massive amounts of political will. Propagating ideas to the contrary is simply irresponsible.

In sub-Saharan Africa, one in every 16 women will die in pregnancy or childbirth. In Afghanistan and Sierra Leone, pregnancy and birth complications kill one in every six women. To take on the millions of maternal deaths worldwide, the UN is backing a landmark global conference set to take place in London this October.

At Women Deliver, more than 2,000 people will come together to strategize new ways to save women's lives and tackle other issues that impede women's access to care such as poverty.

Delegates from more than 75 countries will include cabinet ministers, heads of United Nations and other multilateral agencies, senior government officials, health professionals, researchers, economists, and reproductive health advocates.

"Every minute of every day a woman dies needlessly during pregnancy and childbirth," said conference Honorary Chair Mary Robinson, President of Realizing Rights and former President of Ireland. "That’s ten million women in every generation. Most of these deaths are in the developing world, and most are preventable."

To find out more about Women Deliver, click here.

For more facts on maternal health, click here.

Today, in the Council on Foreign Relations' Daily Analysis, deputy editor Robert McMahon does a good job summarizing a common thread that runs through the foreign policy agendas of the leading '08 candidates:

What is striking so far about the candidates’ foreign policy presentations is the consistent desire, expressed by Republicans and Democrats alike, to have the United States improve and deepen its engagement with the world.

Although the suggested methods of engagement differ, it is clear that the candidates are tapping into the sentiments of American voters, who are becoming increasingly tired of costly, and largely ineffective, unilateral action.

Writing in Foreign Policy, Idean Salehyan takes umbrage with this weeks-old op-ed by Ban Ki-moon in which the Secretary General cites climate change as a contributory factor to the violence in Darfur. The author doesn't doubt the science behind climate change, rather Salehyan quips that pointing out the relationship between conflict and climate change is bad politics. Talking about this link, says, Saleyhan is tantamount to excusing belligerents for starting armed conflict:

[A]rguing that climate change is a root cause of conflict lets tyrannical governments off the hook. If the environment drives conflict, then governments bear little responsibility for bad outcomes. That's why Ban Ki-moon's case about Darfur was music to Khartoum's ears. The Sudanese government would love to blame the West for creating the climate change problem in the first place. True, desertification is a serious concern, but it's preposterous to suggest that poor rainfall--rather than deliberate actions taken by the Sudanese government and the various combatant factions--ultimately caused the genocidal violence in Sudan. Yet by Moon's [sic] perverse logic, consumers in Chicago and Paris are at least as culpable for Darfur as the regime in Khartoum.

First, Ban never said that climate change, alone, is to blame for the conflict in Darfur. This is what he wrote (emphasis mine.) "Amid the diverse social and political causes, the Darfur conflict began as an ecological crisis, arising at least in part from climate change." These are important qualifiers.

But more importantly, Salehyan questions the political utility of highlighting the ecological roots of conflicts like Darfur. I think the answer is a resounding yes, for doing so adds another layer of urgency to international efforts to redress climate change. It is entirely appropriate, for example, for delegates at the coming UN summit on climate change to note that progress they make has real-world consequences for global security.

Simply stating the truth of the matter--that desertification of the sahel has sparked new competition of over resources in Darfur--does not excuse Khartoum and rebel groups for causing a humanitarian crisis. It does, however, help bring to light that our actions on climate change can help mitigate future crises.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon spoke out on gender parity at all levels of the United Nations at a ceremony welcoming the first-ever all-female class of security officers.

"We need to be exemplary and to be the first organization to keep the internationally-agreed commitment of having full gender balance," Ban said.

In his April report on UN system-wide coherence, he said that it is crucial that gender equality "remain the mandate of all United Nations entities.

Also in attendance at today's ceremony was Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro, who said she was heartened by the entry of an all-female class of security officers.

More

Breaking news from the Associated Press:

"The Security Council voted Friday to expand the United Nations' role in Iraq in a move aimed at promoting talks among ethnic and religious rivals and winning support from the country's neighbors.

The resolution, approved unanimously, authorizes the U.N., at the request of the Iraqi government, to promote political talks among Iraqis and a regional dialogue on issues including border security, energy and refugees."

More.

Earlier this week, we flagged a World Meteorological Association release noting a correlation between the record number of extreme weather events this year and record breaking global land surface temperatures. Now, the head of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) says that climate change could lead to potential food shortages and increase the risk of hunger in developing countries. India, says, FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf, will be particularly hard hit, potentially losing 125 million tons of its rain-fed cereal production, or about 20% of its total cereal production.

The New York Times has more.

From the UN News Center:

The United Nations is on target to deploy a mainly African hybrid peace force in the war-wracked Sudanese region of Darfur on schedule, but needs more offers from countries on critical capacities such as aviation and ground transport, a senior UN peacekeeping official said today.

Jane Holl Lute, acting head of the new Department of Field Support, told reporters that "we are hitting the target of a predominantly African force," outlined in last week's Security Council resolution authorizing the creation of the hybrid operation, to be known as UNAMID.

From the Scientific American:

The world experienced a series of record-breaking weather events in early 2007, from flooding in Asia to heatwaves in Europe and snowfall in South Africa, the United Nations weather agency said on Tuesday.

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said global land surface temperatures in January and April were likely the warmest since records began in 1880, at more than 1 degree Celsius higher than average for those months.

There have also been severe monsoon floods across South Asia, abnormally heavy rains in northern Europe, China, Sudan, Mozambique and Uruguay, extreme heatwaves in southeastern Europe and Russia, and unusual snowfall in South Africa and South America this year, the WMO said.

Scary stuff. Read more. And click here for access to the full WMO release.

UN Dispatch was well represented at Yearly Kos at the end of last week. Three out of four Dispatchers made the trip out to Chicago.

Aside from getting to meet many of the bloggers that I had only known as online personas, I thought the foreign policy discussions were the most interesting part of the convention. For the most part, everyone seemed remarkably well-informed. And, even though as a convention largely dedicated to the progressive movement the discussion too often veered toward a single-minded view of the war in Iraq, international cooperation and improving the U.S. image abroad was the underlying sentiment in the forums on U.S. foreign policy.

Unfortunately, that idea was rarely carried through to a discussion on the U.S. role at the United Nations. The UN is the world's platform for international cooperation, and it is clear that strengthening U.S. engagement at the UN should be the centerpiece of our efforts to bolster both our image and our influence abroad. UN Dispatch intends to continue to foster this conversation in part so that at next year's event it attains its natural position at the center of U.S. foreign policy discussions.

Ivo Daalder and Robert Kagan (who are informal foreign policy advisors to presidential hopefuls John McCain and Barack Obama, respectfully) team up in a Washington Post op-ed to argue for the irrelevancy of the Security Council. The council, says Kagan and Daalder, is too beset by competing national interests to suffice as the ultimate arbiter for authorizing humanitarian interventions. Rather, a "concert of democracies" should take on that role.

Matthew Yglesias offers an excellent retort, "to survey the wreckage in Iraq, and conclude that despite the lessons seen there we can't defer to the UN…on the grounds that the UN might sometimes say no is very weak tea."

Agreed. I would also add that contrary to popular perception, the Security Council frequently authorizes foreign military intervention on humanitarian grounds. We just don't hear about them.

In spring 2006, for example, when rioting in East Timor forced some 100,000 people to flee their homes, the Security Council authorized the rapid deployment of Australian troops to restore order. Similarly, in May 2000 when a fragile peace deal in Sierra Leone was on the verge of collapse, the council authorized a deployment of British Special Forces to fight off spoilers.

The fact is, not authorizing military intervention is the exception to the rule at the Security Council. The debates over Iraq and Kosovo are the only two instances over the last eight years in which the Council failed to authorize the use of force when one or more of the P-5 democracies wanted it to. There are eighteen other examples to the contrary. (I would not lump Darfur in the "failure to act" category because no member state has recommended that the council permit a multi-national force to invade Sudan on behalf of the Darfuris. Also, the council first authorized a traditional peacekeeping mission there one year ago.)

Foreign troops are helping to keep the peace in the most forlorn stretches of the globe today precisely because the Security Council is willing and able to act. From 1998 to 2003 some four million people are thought to have perished as a result of war in the Congo. Thanks to Security Council's deployment of some 18,000 troops there, the fighting has largely subsided.

My point is, the perception that that the Security Council is too overcome with competing national interests to permit humanitarian intervention is not in tune with reality.

Matthew Lee of Inner City Press and I hit the very small screen to debate and discuss the UN's role in Iraq, the new Darfur resolution, the UN and new media and more. Enjoy!

On August 10, the mandate of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI) will officially expire. Before then, the United States and Great Britain want the Security Council to approve a new and expanded mandate that would carve out a greater political role for the UN in Iraq. Says Zalmay Khalilzad:

"In order to reduce the sources of violence, we believe that the United Nations can help Iraqis come to a national compact, come to an agreement on these big issues on which there are differences," Khalilzad told reporters on Thursday.

He said that included provincial boundaries such as those around the disputed oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk. Kurds want Kirkuk included in their autonomous region as its capital, but other ethnic groups object.

Back in the fall of 2006, the Iraq Study Group foresaw a possible political and diplomatic role for the United Nations along these lines. But since organizing the so-called "purple finger elections in 2005," UNAMI's political work has been limited. Now, the UN is being asked to do what no other nation or group has yet to be able to accomplish: bring Iraq's factions and Iraq's neighbors together in an attempt to forge some sort of political compromise. Obviously, given the sorry state of things in Iraq, the UN may not even be able to do this. But at least, finally, member states are recognizing that UN-sponsored mediation could be the last best hope for finding a political solution to Iraq's sectarian war.

Yesterday, the new U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad, sat down with CSPAN's Washington Journal to discuss the U.S. relationship with the UN and the UN's role in Iraq. Watch the video.

The otherwise estimable Barbara Slavin of USA Today writes an entire article about the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS), without actually mentioning the treaty by name. Slavin explains how the White House sees "black gold" under the Arctic ice--and references a treaty that would firm up American oil companies' claims to excavate--but she never explicitly states that it is the Law of the Seas Treaty, which sets rules the use of the world's oceans, to which she is referring.

Nevertheless, the article is good. It shows how the Senate's non-ratification of the treaty is undermining American interests. Oil and mineral extraction companies, for example, are wary about the legal firmament of their Arctic claims absent Senate ratification of the treaty. Slavin quotes John Bellinger III, the State Departments' top lawyer, and Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen--both of whom urge the quick ratification of the treaty, which the US signed back in 1982. Though the piece does not mention it (this is a short USA Today article after all) the military also advocates for US ratification because doing so would help it more freely navigate the ocean.

But oil companies and the military are not the only advocates of US ratification of the Law of the Seas. Major environmental groups also see great value in the treaty, which contains provisions for protecting fish stocks and sets marine environmental standards. The treaty has the unanimous support of the Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

So what is stopping its passage? Slavin cites one senator in particular who opposes the treaty on strict ideological grounds. "There's still a little sovereignty left in America," says the Senator. "Let's hold onto it." With the kind of wide ranging support the Law of the Seas Treaty enjoys, however, that kind of atavistic opposition to the treaty cannot hold for too much longer.

As noted below, the Security Council approved a new resolution establishing the 26,000-strong United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur, UNAMID. Remember that acronym, because for the next many months the central tasks facing the international community on Darfur will center around: 1) actually raising the requisite troops for UNAMID; 2) providing UNAMID with a steady funding stream; 3) making sure Khartoum actually permits UNAMID troops to enter Darfur.

None of these challenges will be easy. The Secretary General cannot wave a magic wand and summon peacekeepers -- rather, he must depend on the contributions of member states. Also, at $2 billion this mission will be the most expensive peacekeeping operation in the world -- and cash is not exactly in surplus at UN Peacekeeping. Still, this resolution presents a