(In Spanish) Your Excellency Mr. Raúl Castro Ruz, President of Cuba,
Your Excellency Mr. Juan Manuel Santos, President of Colombia,
Distinguished Heads of State and government,
Excellencies,
Mr. Timoleón Jiménez,
The honorable Mogens Lykketoft, president of the United Nations General Assembly
The honorable François Delattre, president of the United Nations Security Council
Distinguished members of the diplomatic community and honorable hosts,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Good morning, it is an honor to be with you on this important day for Colombia and for Latin America and the Caribbean.
I am very pleased and grateful to have the opportunity to once again enjoy the hospitality of Cuba.
(In English) On this day, in a world beset by seemingly intractable wars, the peace process in Colombia delivers on a key commitment: an agreement on a ceasefire and the laying down of weapons.
Today the Colombian peace process validates the perseverance of all those around the world who work to end violent conflict not through the destruction of the adversary, but through the patient search for compromise.
I want to express my great admiration for the negotiating teams, which have demonstrated that it is possible to achieve peace with dignity for all concerned. They have overcome tense moments and challenging issues to arrive at an historic achievement.
I also congratulate the Governments of Cuba and Norway, which have devoted considerable diplomatic skills to this peace process. Together with the accompanying countries, Chile and Venezuela, they have shown how national peace efforts can be supported faithfully, discreetly and effectively.
Six months ago, the United Nations Security Council and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, or CELAC, responded to the call of the Government of Colombia and the FARC-EP, and made a commitment to support the implementation of the ceasefire agreement and the laying down of weapons.
The signing of this essential component of the peace agreement will strengthen this commitment. It will now be crucial to mobilize the people and resources required for monitoring and verification.
We know that peace talks continue, and that significant issues are still outstanding. But we trust that today’s achievement will provide renewed momentum towards the last phase of the negotiations.
Expectations are now high that the vision articulated in the agreements reached over the past three years will soon become a reality. I strongly encourage you to fulfill these hopes.
We at the United Nations are determined to do everything we can, alongside the Government and the FARC-EP, to translate a remarkable negotiating process into exemplary implementation of the peace commitments made.
In my last year as Secretary-General of the United Nations, it is truly a privilege to participate in this historic event. It is an honor to be by your side in laying the groundwork for lasting peace and a better future for all the country’s people.
Let us now work together so that the promise of peace made today in Havana is fulfilled in Colombia.
Thank you very much. (Applause)

Ban Ki-moon. Foto: Archive.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon recognized Vietnam as a responsible and active member, during a visit which concluded here today inaugurating the Green House number one of the world Organization.

Accompanied by Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Pham Binh Minh, he opened the doors to a building designed by the hosts to bring together all the UN agencies represented in the country and express its multilateral commitment.

With the symbolic name given to the building Vietnam reaffirmed its concern for the environment and climate change, one of the main topics Ki-moon addressed in his discussions during his two days of stay with the main national leaders.

The UN main leader was first received by President, Truong Tan Sang and then met with Prime Minister, Nguyen Tan Dung and Communist Party General Secretary, Nguyen Phu Trong.

At each meeting the interlocutors emphasized the need for a Post-2015 agenda and sustainable development goals in the next September General Assembly and called for greater multidimensional cooperation.

The Vietnamese leaders stressed that the UN must continue to play a role in favor of international peace and global coordinator facing challenges such as political instability, armed conflict, terrorism and extremism and territorial disputes.

(By Prensa Latina)

This dependence makes it all the more astonishing that we have allowed rapid and often unwise human development to disrupt so many of the delicate systems that have functioned harmoniously for millennia.  We are increasingly aware of the damage our species has wrought – the pollution, the dwindling resources, the species of flora and fauna forever gone, the rush towards tipping points that may alter the way our planet functions.  Even with this knowledge, we have yet to change our ways.

But we can change, and 2015 brings a critical opportunity to do just that.  This year, the world aims to finalize the post-2015 sustainable development agenda and reach a new and meaningful universal climate change agreement.  These processes have the potential to redefine our future for the better, by eradicating extreme poverty in all its forms and resetting our relationship with this planet and every living being it sustains.

But the big decisions that lie ahead are not just for world leaders and policy-makers.  Today, on Mother Earth Day, I ask each one of us to be mindful of the impacts our choices have on this planet, and what those impacts will mean for future generations.  Not everyone is able to make sustainable choices, but for those who can, simple decisions such as switching to energy-efficient lighting or buying only what you will consume – when accumulated across billions of people – can transform our world.  The power to change begins with you.

As a global community, we have the opportunity to make 2015 a turning point in human history.  This can be the year our children and grandchildren will remember as when we chose to build a sustainable and resilient future – both for Mother Earth and all those that development has until now left behind.  Let us seize this historic opportunity together.

p>By Thalif Deen

(Inter Press)

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon (left) holds a press conference with Amr Moussa (right), Secretary General of the League of Arab States, in Cairo

The eight-page resolution calls on member states to “immediately” inform both Ban and Moussa of measures taken in enforcing the “no-fly zone” over Libya and also to “coordinate closely” on measures taken to implement the ban on flights, including “to supply a concept of operations”.

“This is probably the first time the head of the U.N. organisation is participating in the planning of military operations,” said Chakravarthi Raghavan, a longstanding journalist who has covered the United Nations both in New York and Geneva since the 1960s.

“I read through the resolution carefully,” he told IPS, and “while various nations acting under the mandate to enforce a no-fly zone and protect civilians are asked to report their actions to the secretary-general, there are (also) paras about ‘cooperating’ with secretary-general.”

But there is nothing in the resolution asking him to coordinate or plan the military operation, said Raghavan, a former editor of the South-North Development Monitor in Geneva.

He said “it is appalling the secretary-general – possibly electioneering for a second term – should have participated in the Paris meeting to plan the military operations.”

The logistics of the no-fly zone were finalised in Paris last week at a meeting of heads of state and foreign ministers, mostly from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), along with Ban and Moussa.

The relevant operative paragraphs in the resolution have also given rise to political ambiguity – on the real role of the U.N. secretary-general in the no-fly zone operations.

“It remains to be seen whether Ban Ki-moon will actually function as General Ban, with any influence over real-time military decision-making,” said Phyllis Bennis, director of the New Internationalism Project at the Washington-based Institute for Policy Studies.

She said the language of the resolution calls for close coordination by the governments participating in military action in Libya, with the secretary general.

“But it remains quite unclear, both from the actual language of the resolution and from statements of the governments carrying out the military actions in Libya, what, if any, the real role of the secretary-general is to be,” she told IPS.

Beyond the calls for governments to “coordinate with each other and the secretary-general” on their military actions, the only specific role assigned to him is to report to the Security Council what implementation is underway, said Bennis, author of “Calling the Shots: How Washington Dominates Today’s U.N.”.

Although Ban Ki-moon participated in the Paris meeting that aimed at coordinating military action, she said, there was no indication following that meeting the U.N. chief was actually playing a substantive role in military decision- making.

It may be that his primary role will be in that “report- back” position, where he will relay to the Security Council – which of course includes five members who have expressed varying degrees of opposition to the U.N.-approved military action in Libya – what the military enforcers are doing, Bennis added.

Given the concern particularly of the Barack Obama administration to insure U.N. backing for the military intervention in Libya, it may be that ensuring the presence of the secretary-general in Paris is primarily a political gesture aimed at reminding the world that this U.S.-French- British attack – with the requisite minimal involvement of other Europeans and, so far in theory, Qatar – does indeed have the U.N.’s imprimatur, she said.

Responding to questions about Ban’s role in coordinating the enforcement of the no-fly zone, U.N. spokesperson Martin Nesirky told reporters Monday the first step the secretary- general undertook was to take part in the high-level meeting in Paris.

“And that was part of the follow-up to the Security Council resolution,” he said.

“And I am sure when he briefs the Council on his return from his trip, as he is also expected to do under the terms of the Security Council resolution, there will be more details about precisely how this is being coordinated,” said Nesirky.

Pressed further whether the secretary-general was told in advance of the air strikes on Libya, Nesirky said: “As you know, countries are duty-bound under the terms of the resolution to notify what measures they are taking. And those notifications are being received and transmitted to the Council as they are received.”

The high-level meeting in Paris, he said, “strikes me as a fairly clear example of coordinating”.

“And further details of what other mechanisms are in place, I am sure, will be becoming clear as the days pass, not least when he briefs the Security Council,” Nesirky added.

Bennis told IPS that given the legacy of illegal unilateral no-fly zones, such as that established by the U.S. and UK in Iraq in 1991, which resulted in the deaths of over 700 civilians – and 144 of them documented by the U.N. in 1999 alone – it is not surprising that keeping the face of the United Nations front and centre remains a high priority for the Western countries attacking Libya.

However, Ban’s follow-up statements calling for “an immediate end to violence by all parties, in accordance with Security Council resolutions 1970 and 1973, and for the responsibility to protect civilians” may represent a potentially important move to reassert the limitations of the U.N. resolution.

Or at least to remind the Western powers of those limitations, she said, pointing out that while the resolution allows the virtually unlimited use of “all necessary measures”, it does restrict those measures to the goal of protecting civilians, not for the purpose of supporting or encouraging or enabling the opposition’s own military efforts.

So the statement of the secretary-general could be seen as distancing his office from the stated regime change goals of the Western powers – goals that clearly violate the terms of the Security Council resolution, but which are just as clearly central to the operative policies of Washington, Paris and London, Bennis declared.

Sophisticated mass media has been saturating our minds with the news of civil wars, arms trade associated with drugs that in just five years have killed more than 35,000 people in Mexico, climatic changes in various countries, asphyxiating heat waves, mountains of ice melting at the poles, torrential rains, shortages and growing prices for foods. We really need some consolation and this has just reached us via that life-saving angel of our species, the United Nations Security Council and its colossal invention: good conduct certificates.

Of course we already know, through the Europa Press Agency, that the number of persons who died as a result of the earthquake and the tsunami were 6,539, and 10,259 were missing, “according to the latest toll”.

Although we still do not know “the exact whereabouts of thousands of people”, the governor of a prefecture has suggested that the survivors ought to move to another part of Japan.

“Damaged airports, ports and highways are being gradually repaired”, a Japanese news agency states.

The British agency Reuters was less optimistic when it stated that “a ‘Chernobyl solution’ could be the last resort” but authorities say that “it is still too soon to talk about long-range measures and that first we have to try to cool the plant’s six reactors and the fuel-storage pools.”

Professor Murray Jennex at San Diego State University in California said: “They (reactors) are kind of like a coffee maker. If you leave it on the heat, they boil dry and then they crack, …”

“Putting concrete on that wouldn’t help keep your coffee maker safe. But eventually, yes, you could build a concrete shield and be done with it.”

Another dispatch from the European agency stated:

“We launched a ‘race against the clock’ to cool down the reactors, declared General Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency Yukiya Amano.”

“‘We are dealing with a very serious accident’, said Amano after meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan, in reference to the Fukushima nuclear plant.”

Without a doubt, the world had been jolted by the unexpected accident in Japan, that moved even the foundations of the planet’s energy development; 442 nuclear plants were functioning, great need for repairs; the Chernobyl accident in 1986 had paralyzed construction programmes of new facilities which were about to resume and be extended.

Wouldn’t our concerns over NATO’s war actions in northern Africa to occupy the rich Libyan fields of light oil and ensure the enormous energy resources in the Middle East after the revolutionary eruption in Arab nations be exaggerated?

Serious threats of a new economic crisis were upsetting economists.

Bad news on the political front keeps on coming.

AFP states that thousands of Shiite demonstrators were shouting anti-government slogans near Manama after Friday prayers, even though Bahraini authorities have prohibited crowds from gathering.

“Repression […] this week caused at least eight deaths: four demonstrators and four police.”

“‘We are ready to sacrifice our blood and our souls for Bahrain’, shouted the demonstrators.”

“Bahraini authorities decreed the exclusion state this week […] within this small kingdom where the US has a base for its Fifth Fleet.”

AFP, March18, 2011

“More than 30 died and around a hundred were injured on Friday after demonstrators were shot at as they demanded the resignation of Yemeni President Ali Abdallah Saleh in Sanah, according to a new toll reported by medical sources.”

“‘Most of those injured were hit by bullets to the head, neck and chest area’, a doctor told AFP.”

This is a close United States ally that also has the support of Saudi forces.

AP, March 18, 2011

“King Abdullah (of Saudi Arabia) spoke after Muslim prayers on Friday. He thanked residents and security forces for being ‘the hands’ of national stability.”

“Islamabad, March 18, (AFP) – thousands demonstrated on Friday in the streets of several Pakistani cities to protest against the American unmanned plane attack that killed 35 people this week and the liberation of a CIA employee who was being held for murder.” He had been set free after two million dollars had been paid to the relatives of the two men he killed in a Lahore street.

Why do we have the Security Council, the veto, the anti-veto, the majority, the minority, abstention, speeches, demagoguery and the solemn declarations of Ban Ki-moon?

Above all, why do we have NATO, its 5.5 million soldiers (according to highly qualified specialists) and its 19,845 tanks, 57,938 armoured vehicles, 6,492 fighter jets, 2,482 helicopters, 19 aircraft carriers, 156 submarines, 303 surface vessels, 5,728 nuclear missiles, tens of thousands of atomic bombs with the destructive power equivalent to hundreds of thousand times the capacity of those dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

There is more than enough of such stupid power, it wouldn’t be used, nor can it be used; we would need dozens of planet such as Earth. Its only purpose is to demonstrate the waste and the chaos generated by capitalism.

We can dedicate our time to other things, less sinister and more ludicrous.

For example, the DPA agency informs us:

“Port-au-Prince, March 18, 2011. The arrival of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Port-au-Prince this Friday cannot have taken anyone by surprise.”

“January 19: From South Africa, Aristide published an ‘open letter’ where he says he is ‘ready’ to return to Haiti’ at any time to ‘contribute as a simple citizen in the field of education’…”

“January 20: The American State Department is opposed to the return of Aristide before at least the end of the electoral process…”.

The State Department has gotten mixed up even in this: it was the US that gave birth to Papa Doc, and it had overthrown and expelled President Aristide to Africa 7 years ago.

A Notimex dispatch, dated in Panama today, March 18th, informed that WikiLeaks revealed the entry of US warships to Panama:

“The covenant was signed on April 15, 2009 so that military vessels could enter Panamanian waters between May 3rd and the end of Torrijos’ term on June 30th this year, when the president was succeeded by the right-wing Ricardo Martinelli.

“‘Until now, the Panamanian government has always refused to do this requirement arguing that operations with the United States Army were a sensitive matter for Panamanians’…”

Another interesting tale about the trickery of US foreign policy is told today by AP:

“Chile and the United States signed a nuclear energy treaty on Friday, despite the fears of the spread of radiation in Japan”.

“The fear arises after a devastating earthquake and subsequent tidal wave severely affected the nuclear reactors in a plant on the north-eastern coast of Japan”.

“The treaty was signed on Friday morning by US Ambassador Alejandro Wolff and Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs Alfredo Moreno.”

“…White House officials were not able to confirm the highly awaited signing which one supposes would be a notable event during the visit to Chile on Monday of President Barack Obama.”

But no matter, appearances can always be life-saving and public opinion can be manipulated by appearances; White House officials emphasized “that the treaty focuses on training nuclear engineers and not on the construction of reactors.”

Since Japanese nuclear technology is basically Yankee, their technicians surely would acquire more experience studying what happened in that beleaguered country whose population was victim of a cruel and unscrupulous predecessor of the current president of the United States.

Who are Obama, NATO and Ban Ki-moon going to fool with good conduct certificates?

Fidel Castro Ruz
March 18, 2011
8:54 p.m.