ACUNS Newsletter, 2015 - No. 1 by Wilfrid Laurier University

ENJOY as part of your ACUNS membership

QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER ISSUE 1 > 2015

THE UNITED NATIONS’

HUMAN RIGHTS UP FRONT INITIATIVE

PLUS

BUILDING ON THE MDG EXPERIENCE TO CREATE A TRULY TRANSFORMATIVE 2030 AGENDA

Not yet in force but already effective: The ban on nuclear testing

CONNECT WITH US

Q > CONTENTS QUARTERLY

FEATURE ONE

THREE PILLARS OF ACTION: THE UNITED NATIONS’ HUMAN RIGHTS UP FRONT INITIATIVE | 3 Jan Eliasson Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations

SPECIAL FEATURE:

BUILDING ON THE MDG EXPERIENCE TO CREATE A TRULY TRANSFORMATIVE 2030 AGENDA | 5 Elham Seyedsayamdost Cordier Fellow and PhD candidate, Columbia University

FEATURE TWO:

NOT YET IN FORCE BUT ALREADY EFFECTIVE: THE BAN ON NUCLEAR TESTING | 7 Lassina Zerbo Executive Secretary, Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CNTBTO)

AM15 THE UN AT 70: GUARANTEEING SECURITY AND JUSTICE JOH N W. HOLMES ME M ORIAL LECTURE

Abiodun Williams President, The Hague Institute for Global Justice and Chair, ACUNS

CAN THE UN GUARANTEE SECURITY AND JUSTICE?

THURSDAY – SATURDAY

> June 11-13, 2015 The Hague Institute for Global Justice and the International Institute of Social Studies The Netherlands

WELCOME TO ACUNS

STARTING POINT

up2date news & opinions

As changeable as the weather SECRETARIAT STAFF

Like the alternating seasons, and the changing weather, the events that take place throughout the calendar year at ACUNS offer an opportunity to look ahead, plan for seasons filled with learning and networking opportunities, and to anticipate the variety of events and changing venues that draw us back year after year.

Alistair Edgar Executive Director, ACUNS Associate Professor, Wilfrid Laurier University

Dr. Alistair Edgar, ACUNS

Watching the snow falling heavily and steadily outside my office window is a good reason to stay inside and work on this Newsletter while “listening in” on a conference call of the Global Compact Network Canada. I do so, shortly after Brenda and I travelled to New Orleans–and a warmer climate, even though people told us it was cold there! – to attend the ISA Annual Convention. There, we had the chance to connect again with Council members at the ACUNS co-sponsored reception on Wednesday evening, as well as the Friday morning breakfast panel hosted by Global Governance journal. Next on the agenda, attending the New York meeting of the Commission on Global Security, Justice and Governance, established by The Hague Institute for Global Justice and The Stimson Center and co-chaired by Ibrahim Gambari and Madeleine Albright. This event will be hosted by the International Peace Institute, at their wonderful 12th floor offices opposite UN headquarters.

T > 226.772.3167 E > aedgar@wlu.ca

Brenda Burns, Co-ordinator T > 226.772.3142 F > 226.772.0016 E > bburns@wlu.ca

Denoja Kankesan, Administrative Assistant T > 226.772.3121

Before getting into our plans for ACUNS in the rest of 2015 and beyond, I do need to stop for a moment and make note of the ACUNS Vienna UN Conference that was held in mid-January. ACUNS Vienna Liaison Officer Michael Platzer and his tremendous team of young collaborators, hosted by UNODC and actively engaged by senior leadership of UNIS, UNIDO, UNCITRAL, UNOOSA, IAEA, and CTBTO as well as the Austrian Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, University of Vienna, the Diplomatic Academy and the City of Vienna, brought together a wide range of expert practitioners and scholars to discuss the MDGs-SDGs transition. Following a recorded video message from Amina Mohammed, Special Advisor on Post-2015 Development Planning, and keynote speaker H.E. Peter Launsky-Tiefenthal, Austrian Federal Ministry for Europe, Integration and International Affairs, special guest H.E. Mrs. Margareta Timofti, First Lady of the Republic of Moldova, also joined the opening event and spoke to the packed conference room in Building C of the Vienna International Centre. Michael and his team already are planning for the 2016 conference, while participating in, or planning for, a wide array of events, conferences and other initiatives in Vienna, Qatar, New York and elsewhere.

E > dkankesan@wlu.ca

BOARD MEMBERS 2014-2015

Chair-Elect: Lorraine Elliott Australian National University

Chair: Abiodun Williams The Hague Institute for Global Justice

Vice Chairs: Roger Coate Georgia College and State University

We are working closely with The Hague Institute for Global Justice and the International Institute of Social Studies in building the plenary and special events program for the 2015 Annual Meeting. We have received a good number of paper and panel proposals, and expect to have a full slate of panels with a waiting list, by our submission deadline – which we always place after the ISA Annual Convention to allow members to turn their focus onto us. Our second core program, the ACUNS-ASIL Summer Workshop, this year will take place at a later time than normal: instead of July, we are looking at the last week of October 2015. I am very pleased to report that we will be hosted by Cedric de Coning and colleagues at NUPI, the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. The Call for Applications now is available, with information in this Newsletter and on the ACUNS web site.

Melissa Labonte Fordham University

MEMBERS Thomas Biersteker, The Graduate Institute, Geneva Mary Farrell, University of Greenwich Kirsten Haack, Northumbria University

Looking even further forward, I can confirm that the 2016 Annual Meeting is slated for Fordham University, New York, led by current ACUNS Vice-Chair Melissa Labonte and with strong support from their senior administration. We are actively working to hold the 2017 Annual Meeting in South Korea, hosted by our tremendous colleagues at KACUNS. Preliminary discussions for the host site 2018 also are underway!

Sukehiro Hasegawa, Hosei University Margaret Karns, University of Dayton

Finally, writing on behalf of Brenda, Denoja, and Gwenith, I hope that ACUNS members are satisfied with the continuing efforts we are making to build more substance into the website, quarterly Newsletter, monthly E-Update, and other programs from the secretariat, while also enjoying their issues of Global Governance under the strong editorial leadership of ACUNS stalwart Ramesh Thakur.

Nanette Svenson, Tulane University

I look forward to meeting and greeting ACUNS members, old and new, in The Hague; and as always, please remember that we welcome your ideas, suggestions, and potential articles for our future newsletters and podcasts.

A C U N S Q UA R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R

ISSUE 1

2015

A C U N S . O R G 2

THREE PILLARS OF ACTION CHANGE TO THE UN SYSTEM’S ENGAGEMENT WITH MEMBER STATES

OPERATIONAL CHANGE

CULTURAL CHANGE

FEATURE STORY > JAN ELIASSON DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS

THE UNITED NATIONS’ HUMAN RIGHTS UP FRONT INITIATIVE

THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT THAT THE WORLD EXPECTS THE UNITED NATIONS TO ACT

WHEN THERE IS A RISK OF LARGE SCALE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. THIS WAS ONE OF THE CORE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE ORGANIZATION WAS CREATED 70 YEARS AGO, AND REMAINS JUST AS CENTRAL TO THE UN TODAY.

THE UN CHARTER

expresses the determination of the peoples to “reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights” and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for international law can be maintained. Over the years, through resolutions and declarations adopted by the Security Council and the General Assembly, UN Member States have added detail to these responsibilities, placing special emphasis on early warning and prevention. Member States and UN institutions have not always met the highest standards in their responses. The 1994 Rwandan genocide, when an estimated 800,000 people were killed in just three months, represents one of the most tragic failures of international action.

DEVELOPMENT

PEACE & SECURITY

HUMAN RIGHTS

FEATURE ONE

When the UN acts with common purpose to protect human rights, the Organization can have a transformational impact.

he Rwanda genocide was followed by renewed commitments from the world’s governments and the UN to never again fail so profoundly. Today, the UN office with primary responsibility for human rights – the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights – has considerably increased capacity from when it was established twenty years ago. The UN now has specialist offices for prevention of genocide, children affected by armed conflict, sexual violence in conflict and the rule of law. The UN’s development, humanitarian and peacekeeping efforts all now include a significant human rights perspective. Doctrines of “protection” or “protection of civilians” are commonly included in UN work in crises. Security Council resolutions regularly refer to the imperative to protect human rights and respect humanitarian law. ‘Human rights’ are now recognized as one of the three pillars of overall UN action along with peace and security and development. Every day, across all world regions, UN personnel are at work on the ground. Humanitarian personnel operate in war zones, delivering support to millions of people fleeing conflict. Development workers take early preventive measures. Peacekeepers conduct hundreds of patrols through towns, villages and rural hills every month. Human rights officers investigate illegal arrests and detentions, disappearances, killings and torture – travelling to the sites of battles, military camps and secret detention centres. And yet, despite these efforts to improve our response, we have continued to see such violations on a massive scale. In 2009, there were allegations of large scale violations of international human rights and humanitarian law being committed during the final stages of the armed conflict in Sri Lanka. This was followed by the death and displacement of great numbers of people during the Arab Awakening. Over the past year alone, killings and forced displacement in Syria, Central African Republic, Iraq and Nigeria have reached grave levels. Notwithstanding UN efforts in these countries and elsewhere, many people caught in crises are keenly aware of the huge gap between the UN’s commitment to prevention and protection and their daily reality. Member States, and the UN system, have not yet succeeded in systematically delivering effective action to prevent large-scale violations. It is impossible to measure the number of lives saved by improved UN action since the reform efforts that followed the Rwandan genocide and UN failure in Srebrenica. But what is clear is that, over this period, millions more people have lost their lives in crises and have been forcibly displaced amid large-scale violations of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. The price of inadequate reaction to these tragedies has been human suffering on a massive scale, and disastrous consequences for peace and security, as well as for development. This pattern cannot continue. When the UN acts with common purpose to protect human rights, the Organization can have a transformational impact. True change must come at two levels – through UN Member States, and through the Secretary-General and UN entities and staff. The first main element - political unity among Member States on the imperative of preventing large scale violations - is crucial to

strengthened UN action. All Member States have legitimate national political interests that they seek to further, including at the UN. But there is also a higher purpose that comes with membership of the Organization, and especially of the Security Council. Both national interests and the UN’s core purposes would be better served if Member States were to take essential steps when violations are imminent or occurring. The Security Council’s prompt response to specific situations – for example, to the use of chemical weapons in Syria in 2013 - shows the Council’s ability to reach early agreement and to have immediate positive impact. Member States should find the key to more systematic unity and action on prevention. Some proposals aim to strengthen the working of the Security Council to this end. Also, the UN system can support Member States by providing earlier and better information on evolving situations. The second main element to strengthen UN action relates to the work of UN staff on the ground and at Headquarters, and their engagement with Member States. When questions were raised as to whether the UN had met its responsibilities to respond to serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law during the final stages of the conflict in Sri Lanka in 2009, the Secretary-General established an independent UN Internal Review Panel. The Panel’s November 2012 report described a “systemic failure” of UN action, including among Member States on the Security Council and Human Rights Council, as well as the UN System of Secretariat, agencies, funds and programmes. In January 2013, the Secretary-General asked me, as Deputy Secretary-General, to lead a process that would translate the Panel’s recommendations into practical changes. The result of that effort was the “Human Rights Up Front Action Plan” which was approved by the Secretary-General in July 2013. The Action Plan represents an effort to ensure that the UN system meets the responsibilities assigned by Member States and the duties to “We the peoples”, referred to in the Charter. The Plan calls for courage and commitment from UN staff. It also seeks to strengthen UN support for national action, both at Headquarters and in the field. It contains over 60 specific measures, to be implemented by different entities within the UN System. They seek to change UN efforts in three ways: cultural change; operational change; and change in UN political engagement with Member States. To achieve cultural change, Human Rights Up Front calls on UN staff, especially senior staff, to take principled stances and to act with moral courage when confronted with the possibility of serious human rights violations. It promises that the Organization will support them when they do so. It means that staff must be prepared to fully consider the human rights situation in which they operate and act in a principled and concerted manner. Human Rights Up Front demands greater accountability for UN action and calls on the UN System to stay attuned to human rights violations that can be a signal of worse developments to come. To ensure that cultural change takes root, Human Rights Up Front promotes operational change in the field and at Headquarters. These changes seek to ensure UN preparedness in action and a streamlining of processes for system-wide analysis, early warning, decision-making Continued on page 9 >

A C U N S Q UA R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R

ISSUE 1

2015

A C U N S . O R G 4

Credit: www.un.org/millenniumgoals/

BUILDING ON THE MGD EXPERIENCE TO CREATE A TRULY TRANSFORMATIVE 2030 AGENDA

SPECIAL FEATURE > E L H A M S E Y E D S AYA M D O S T

The much-anticipated year 2015 is already here. We have almost reached the deadline of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the by now well-known set of internationally-agreed targets to reduce poverty and advance human development. In the meantime, the international community has been hard at work to develop the foundations of the post-2015 agenda while drawing on lessons learned from the MDG experience. However, one fundamental question has been missing from debates: have the MDGs impacted governments’ decision-making?

CORDIER FELLOW AND PHD CANDIDATE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

5 KEY FINDINGS When this question is raised, many point to the difficulty of giving an accurate answer because of the missing counterfactual, i.e. how can we assess the impact of the MDGs if we don’t know what would have happened in their absence? Of course, there are many methodological issues that plague any research design attempting to answer this question, but if the goal of the global development agenda is to influence governments’ national planning, we need to at least attempt to find some answers. A recently finished report sheds some light on this question.1 The report examines the impact of MDGs on national development strategies of 50 diverse countries. The sample includes countries from all the geographical regions, income groups, human development tiers, and foreign aid levels. The study generated five key findings. FIRST, 32 or two-thirds of the countries under review integrated the MDGs in their national strategies. They either used the targets and indicators as a monitoring framework or adapted them to their national contexts. Countries have chosen different adaptation strategies from including additional goals, to adding extra targets or indicators, to disaggregating targets through subnational planning. This finding is indeed encouraging as it indicates that the majority of the countries embraced the MDGs and incorporated them in the formulation of their plans.

SECOND, of the 32 MDG-aligned plans, over 80% belonged to low- and lower middle-income countries, most of which were PRSP countries. In fact, the high correlation between PRSP status and incorporation of MDGs was striking and possibly intuitive. After all, the poverty reduction and strategy paper is a precondition required by both IMF and the World Bank for highly indebted poor countries’ access to debt relief and concessional financing. Indeed, many PRSP countries are also in the least-developed country category with high reliance on ODA and a significant debt burden. THIRD, and following from the above, the higher a country’s reliance on ODA was, the higher its likelihood to have an MDG-based development strategy. More specifically, all the countries, in which ODA made up 10% or more of their national income, had MDG-aligned plans, while of the 25 countries with 1-10% ODA, the majority (80%) had MDG-based plans. The correlation between high ODA/PRSP status and greater MDG integration can be interpreted in two ways. One, these countries have found these global targets and indicators to be relevant and useful to their developmental progress. Two, they have found the MDGs to offer them a means to more easily demonstrate to donors that their strategies focus on poverty reduction policies, at least in terms of planning. This

would indicate that they integrated the MDGs strategically to ensure they fulfill all the requirements needed to receive funding. The FOURTH key finding is about the characteristics of the six upper-middle income countries that aligned their plans with MDGs. Four of them (Brazil, Costa Rica, Mauritius and Peru) had governments committed to reduce poverty, one was a crisis country (Iraq), and the sixth was a PRSP country (Albania). This perhaps is the best indication that where the MDGs did not necessarily resonate with the development stage of the country, pro-poor governments used them to push their povertyreducing agendas. Otherwise, the influence of the donor community in the internal policy planning of these countries could explain the high integration of the MDGs in their plans. The FIFTH and most striking finding is the disconnect between planning and implementation. An examination of public spending trends on health and education following MDG-based planning did not find any strong evidence for MDGs leading to policy change in as far as budgetary allocations to these social sectors were concerned. In fact, those that ignored the MDGs in their planning were as likely to increase their health and education expenditure as those that had MDG-aligned plans.

1 Elham Seyedsayamdost, MDG-based National Planning: An Assessment, unpublished report commissioned by UNdP, 30 November 2014.

ACUNS.ORG

Continued on next page >

S i g n u p f o r o u r E > U P D AT E b y b e c o m i n g a m e m b e r !

I M PAC T

MEMBER PUBLICATIONS The Procedure of the UN Security Council Fourth Edition Loraine Sievers and Sam Daws | Oxford University Press

In summary, these findings suggest that the MDGs have certainly put poverty on the map, generated awareness among policy makers and the public about the centrality of poverty reduction, and even percolated into national planning instruments of most countries. However, data also indicate that planning has not necessarily translated into actionable poverty reducing projects.

Fourth Edition

Tana Johnson | Oxford University Press In life, delegation is fundamental. But it is difficult, especially when attempted internationally, as in the long delegation chains to the United Nations family and other global governance structures. In Organizational Progeny, Tana Johnson shows that in a variety of policy areas, global governance structures are getting harder for national governments to control— not only because the quantity and staffing of international organizations has mushroomed, but also because the people working in these organizations try to insulate any new organizations against governments’ interference.

While a lot of effort has gone into ensuring that the SDGs will be the product of a participatory and inclusive process that gives rise to a universal agenda, below are listed some considerations that need to be taken into account before the 2030 development agenda has been carved out.

Timor-Leste: The History and Development of Asia’s Newest Nation Abraham Joseph and Takako Hamaguchi - Lexington Books Timor-Leste: The History and Development of Asia’s Newest Nation is a study of how a small Asia-Pacific nation has emerged from protracted conflict and successfully navigated a path to durable peace and sustainable development. The book provides insights into the reconstruction of a nation rising from the ashes of destruction and its rapid transformation into a peaceful and democratic state with great economic promise. In this book, the co-authors first present an overview of the economic history of modern Timor-Leste, then explore various issues that the country has encountered in its quest for peace and prosperity, including management of oil and gas resources, promotion of agriculture and food security, its response to climate change, its work on the UN Millennium Development Goals and programs for the vulnerable, and its partnership with other nations, before concluding with a brief analysis of the Strategic Development Plan 2011-2030, which is designed to guide the new nation toward the goal of building an environmentally sustainable and democratic society at the upper middle of the income ladder with extreme poverty and deprivation fully eradicated.

FIRST, we need to have a serious and honest conversation about the ways in which global agendas can impact governments’ decision making. Although international law and international relations studies have examined mechanisms that ensure governments keep the promises they make, we have not applied those lessons to the field of development. The SECOND and more contentious issue is about strategies. We cannot expect world leaders to endorse one and the same strategy for improving human development in their societies, hence it is expected that the SDGs will focus on quantitative and time-bound targets. However, we need to discuss and better understand what the strategies of successful countries are, what approaches to economic policy work, what the role of the state is, etc. Experience has shown us that one-size-fits-all policies do not work. We need to discuss and learn what works within what context, and the SDGs need to draw on that knowledge in determining the next targets of the global agenda. FINALLY, and most importantly, we need to discuss and assess the feasibility of the next round of goals by creating a framework that focuses on implementation. Instead of emphasizing reporting and counting the number of reports that have been produced as a result of an SDG-based analysis— something that was avidly done in the initial MDG years— we need to ensure that the SDGs provide us with a practical plan whose implementation can easily be tracked. We need to have this debate now so that in 2030 we don’t find ourselves emphasizing the counterfactual when asked about the impact of the SDGs.

ISSUE 1

SIEVERS AND DAWS

Organizational Progeny: Why Governments are Losing Control over the Proliferating Structures of Global Governance

Where does this leave us in terms of the upcoming Sustainable Development Goals?

The Procedure of the UN Security Council

The Procedure of the UN Security Council is the definitive book of its kind, providing unique insight into the inside workings of the world’s preeminent body for the maintenance of international peace and security. The book’s first three editions have been widely read by UN diplomats and scholars for nearly 40 years. Now Loraine Sievers, former Chief of the UN Security Council Secretariat Branch, and Sam Daws, Director of the Project on UN Governance and Reform at the Centre for International Studies at Oxford University, have co-authored a comprehensively revised fourth edition. The fourth edition adds over 450 pages of new material, meticulously referenced, which details the rapid and extensive innovations in the Council’s procedures over the past two decades.

How can we assess the impact of the MDGs if we don’t know what would have happened in their absence?

A C U N S Q UA R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R

MPub

* Elham Seyedsayamdost is a doctoral candidate (ABD) in the Department of Political Science, where she has been specializing in political economy of development, comparative politics, and international relations. Prior to her doctoral studies, she spent several years working with the United Nations and the World Bank.

Elham holds a Master of International Affairs from Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs, where she focused on economic and political development, as well as a B.A. in international and comparative politics from The American University of Paris.

THE ROAD TO DIGNITY BY 2030: ENDING POVERTY, TRANSFORMING ALL LIVES AND PROTECTING THE PLANET

2 0 3 0 AG E N DA >

2015

A C U N S . O R G 6

NOT YET IN FORCE BUT ALREADY EFFECTIVE FEATURE STORY

> DR. LASSINA ZERBO EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE NUCLEAR -TEST-BAN TREATY ORGANIZATION (CTBTO)

THE BAN ON NUCLEAR TESTING HISTORICALLY, NUCLEAR TESTING

was not only regarded as a means to develop the most destructive weapons ever devised, but it was used to convey a political message: a display of military prowess – sometimes paired with a thinly veiled threat of the weapon’s actual use.

In today’s perspective, it is important to remember that nuclear weapons and their testing have their roots in the one of the most deadly conflicts of our time, the Second World War. So in a way, renouncing nuclear testing is captured within the very essence of the United Nations’ culture of peace and international cooperation established after the war, which has the ultimate goal of preventing a recurrence of such dark times.

FEATURE TWO

THESE ACTIVITIES ENSURE THAT THE KNOW-HOW AND TECHNOLOGIES USED BY THE ORGANIZATION ARE TRANSFERRED TO ITS MEMBER STATES, ENABLING THEM TO MAKE FULL USE OF THE MONITORING TECHNOLOGIES AND BENEFIT FROM THEIR DEVELOPMENTAL SPILL-OVER EFFECTS.

hroughout the Cold War, nuclear testing thoroughly poisoned the political environment, not to mention the poisonous effects on human health and the environment in literal terms. While 400 to 500 nuclear explosions were carried out every decade between 1945 and 1996, the good news is that we have come a long way: we have witnessed a mere three tests this millennium. What was once a proud display of military might is now widely regarded as an irresponsible and provocative State activity that is met with unequivocal international condemnation. The 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which bans all nuclear explosions, everywhere and by everyone, has played a key role in this tide of change. But the job of banning nuclear tests is not finished. The CTBT has yet to become global law due to its demanding entry into force clause, which requires the signature and ratification of all 44 countries listed as nuclear technology holders. At present, eight of those countries have yet to join: India, North Korea and Pakistan are the only non-signatories from this list, while China, Egypt, Iran, Israel and the United States have signed the CTBT but must still complete their ratification process. Until this is achieved, a return to renewed nuclear testing with all its disastrous implications for global security and stability, health and the environment remains a present threat. Against the backdrop of escalating tensions in the international environment and the emergence of rising nuclear powers on the world stage, nuclear disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation agreements have already started to show alarming signs of erosion. Is this cause to worry? Yes. A reason to despair? Definitely not. The CTBT draws its strength not only from the stigmatization of nuclear testing but is also underpinned by the world’s most sophisticated verification regime. Comprising 337 monitoring facilities and 250 communication assets in nearly 90 countries around the world, this verification regime represents the most expansive monitoring system ever designed. The system employs seismic, infrasound, hydroacoustic and radionuclide technologies to monitor the entire globe for any signs of a nuclear explosion. The Treaty’s International Monitoring System is currently over 90% complete. Long before it reached this level, the three nuclear tests announced by North Korea put the system to the test, and it passed each of these tests with flying colours. In 2006 the identified test area was 880 km², whereas in 2013 the increased accuracy of our system allowed us to narrow the test area down to 181 km², well within the 1000 km² designated by the Treaty for an on-site inspection. Moreover, Xenon gasses detected by our Noble gas station in Japan 55 days after the 2013 announced DPRK nuclear test were consistent with a late release of the gasses from the DPRK test site. On-site inspections are the CTBT’s most powerful verification measure. Through the Integrated Field Exercise - IFE14 - in Jordan in November 2014, the organization proved its capabilities to conduct an on-site inspection under realistic and challenging conditions. Real on-site inspections, however, will only be possible once the Treaty has entered into force.

In 2016, the CTBT will mark its 20th anniversary. Perhaps this would be a fitting occasion to review how much the organization has achieved. While still known formally as the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, we can say with pride that we are now fully prepared to verify any violation of the CTBT, and that the preparatory nature of the organization are a thing of the past. To paraphrase Hans Blix: The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty is a treaty not yet in force, but already effective; a Preparatory Commission with nothing preparatory about it, and a unique blend of politics and technology. Why am I cautiously optimistic that one day, nuclear testing will also be a thing of the past? Because of the sustained support we receive from our 183 Member States. Support on many levels: Financially, because of the vast investment into our system, which has a price tag of over US$1 billion; politically, because our Member States never tire of advocating the CTBT at the highest levels; and finally, because of the technical and scientific support we enjoy from hundreds of experts who continuously help us to improve our system and our services. Member States also appreciate our data and services for the spin-off benefits they bring in addition to detecting nuclear tests. Since the devastating Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004, the Treaty’s verification system has contributed to tsunami early warning efforts in cooperation with other UN organizations. We are currently providing data from around 110 IMS stations to tsunami warning centres in 15 countries to help them issue more timely and precise warnings. During the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident, the CTBTO’s radionuclide stations tracked the dispersion of radioactivity on a global scale. In recognition of its role in disaster mitigation and risk reduction, the CTBTO was asked to join the Inter-agency Committee on Radiological and Nuclear Emergencies, which is an international body made up of 18 UN organizations. Scientists have found our monitoring data useful for studying meteor blasts, climate change, the Earth’s inner structures, and even the migration patterns of marine mammals. In addition to their primary purpose of enhancing global security by ensuring that no nuclear test evades detection, the multiple uses of CTBTO data for scientific research are as fascinating as the history of the CTBT itself. All of these issues will be discussed in depth at the CTBT: Science and Technology Conference 2015 in Vienna this June, the world’s largest scientific forum in the area of nuclear-test ban verification and its spin-off benefits. Through its integrated capacity-building and training activities, the CTBTO not only encourages the full utilization of its monitoring data and active participation in the build-up of the system, but also promotes research and education related to the Treaty and its verification technologies. These activities ensure that the know-how and technologies used by the organization are transferred to its Member States, enabling them to make full use of the monitoring

Continued on page 9 >

A C U N S Q UA R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R

ISSUE 1

2015

ACUNS.ORG

THE UNITED NATIONS’ HUMAN RIGHTS UP FRONT INITIATIVE

NOT YET IN FORCE BUT ALREADY EFFECTIVE THE BAN ON NUCLEAR TESTING

Continued from page 4 >

Continued from page 8 >

and coordination. The result will be better defined and common strategies for the UN system to prevent or respond, and for rapid delivery of support to implement them. Finally, to ensure that cultural and operational change have full impact, and to support the responsibilities of Member States, Human Rights Up Front seeks change to the UN System’s engagement with Member States. Through proactive engagement, especially with States within an affected region, and more effective use of the tools in the UN Charter, Human Rights Up Front seeks to generate political support for UN preventive action or responses. It asks UN officials to be forthright in presenting information on violations, even when this may be diplomatically challenging. It invites Member States to view more effective action on human rights as a means to meet the Organization’s overall goals of peace and security, development and human rights. One and a half years on, the initiative has tapped into a chord among UN staff and many Member States alike: a common desire to see the UN fully meet the aspirations of the Charter. It is starting to have an impact on actions across the UN system. It is changing the way the UN’s senior staff examine and respond to crisis situations. Human Rights Up Front has been used to change the UN’s analysis and response to numerous ongoing crises. At the Principal level of the Organization, a mechanism–, led on behalf of the Secretary-General by me alongside the Chair of the UN Development Group, and UNDP Administrator, Ms. Helen Clark - assures highlevel analysis, strategy, decision-making and accountability. Through this body’s decisions, the initiative provided the basis for a significant change in the Secretariat’s advocacy to the Security Council on the Central African Republic, prompting Member States to strengthen their actions and deploy peacekeeping forces. In South Sudan, it triggered the Secretary-General’s personal support for the policy of the UN peacekeeping operation to open the gates of its compounds and provide shelter to tens of thousands of people in desperate need of protection. At senior management levels the Human Rights Up Front Action Plan has led to a process of scanning situations where crisis has not yet occurred but where there may be early concerns. The mechanism combines development, political, human rights, and humanitarian analysis to better understand a country situation and to address issues that have serious implications for human rights. These issues may stem from economic, social and cultural or civil and political problems. The goal of the response is to support national authorities in preserving development, peace and security, and human rights gains in all countries. The Secretary-General and I have presented the initiative to Member States at the General Assembly. Security Council Members have also

ACUNS.ORG

referred to it on numerous occasions. Efforts to familiarize States with the initiative are continuing.

technologies and benefit from their developmental spill-over effects.

We are still a long way from full implementation of the Action Plan. Over the next year, its application is to be fully extended from headquarters to the field and from crisis to prevention. The success of the initiative will require strong and courageous leadership at all levels of the UN system. The goal is that by the end of 2016 Human Rights Up Front will be a regular part of the way the UN works, strengthening the UN’s impact and efficiency. At its core, Human Rights Up Front is about ensuring that the UN meets the aspirations of its founding Charter within the complex realities and demands of today’s world. Millions of lives are fundamentally affected by the UN’s ability to deliver on its responsibilities to Member States and the people they represent. We must meet those responsibilities to the highest possible standard. * Jan Eliasson was appointed the first UN Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and was involved in operations in Somalia, Sudan, Mozambique and the Balkans – taking initiatives on landmines, conflict prevention and humanitarian action.

In 1993-1994, Eliasson served as mediator in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. In 2005, he served as President of the UN General Assembly, then from January 2007 to July 2008, Eliasson was the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Darfur. On 2 March 2012, Jan Eliasson was appointed Deputy Secretary- General of the UN by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. He took office as Deputy Secretary-General on 1 July, 2012.

Just as capacity-building and training is a key enabler for development and the sustainment of the CTBT and its robust verification infrastructure, the CTBT itself becomes a key enabler for peace, security and development. The Academic Council of the United Nations System (ACUNS) is a key collaborating partner in these initiatives, and as we continue to cultivate our engagement with ACUNS and our other partners in the international community, I am confident that we will one day soon reach our common goal of creating a world free of nuclear tests. * Dr Lassina Zerbo is the Executive Secretary of the CTBTO, a position which he assumed in August 2013. Previously, he served as Director of the International Data Centre (IDC) at the CTBTO.

During a professional career spanning nearly 25 years, Zerbo has developed expertise ranging from scientific and technical competencies to results-based management and multilateral diplomacy. As the focal point on CTBT issues related to the nuclear tests conducted by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in 2006 and 2009, the triple disaster in Japan in March 2011, and technical assistance for tsunami warning systems, Zerbo serves as the custodian of all technically sensitive information of the organization. He remains responsible for the release of this information to Member States and their institutions in compliance with the Treaty’s requirements.

Zerbo was the Project Executive for the Science and Technology Conference 2013 and is Chairman of the Scientific Committee.

ACUNS/ASIL SUMMER WORKSHOP ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL STUDIES

CALL FOR APPLICATIONS

SWIOS15 STUDY OPPORTUNITY

The Evolution of UN Peace Operations: Contemporary Challenges and Requirements October 26 - November 1, 2015

Norwegian Institute for International Affairs (NUPI) | Oslo, Norway

ONLINE APPLICATIONS Visit: http://acuns.org/2015-summer-workshop-on-line-application/ Applications must be completed by Monday, June 8, 2015. Questions? Please email admin@acuns.org or call (1) 226.772.3121 A C U N S S E C R E T A R I A T > Wilfrid Laurier University, 75 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3C5

S i g n u p f o r o u r E > U P D AT E b y b e c o m i n g a m e m b e r !

ACUNS ANNUAL MEETING CALL FOR PAPERS - WORKSHOP PANELS

AM15 11-13 JUNE, 2015 The Hague, The Netherlands

In June 2015, the ACUNS Annual Meeting celebrates the 70th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. In cooperation with our host institutions; The Hague Institute for Global Justice and the International Institute of Social Studies, ACUNS invites its members, and other interested scholars and practitioners, to join us in The Hague to engage in critical, informed discussions of the achievements, the deficits and the ongoing challenges of the United Nations system in nurturing, developing, promoting and defending ideas and practices of security and justice in global governance.

A P P L I C AT I O N P R OCEDU R E

The full text of the Call for Papers is available at acuns.org/am2015

Submissions: To submit an individual proposal or a full panel proposal, you will be required to upload full contact information, the paper/panel title(s), abstract(s) of no more than 200 words, biographical note(s) of no more than 200 words, and biographical notes of no more than 250 words.

ANNUA L MEETING TH EM E

The UN at 70: Guaranteeing Security and Justice The Academic Council on the United Nations System (ACUNS) is now accepting workshop paper and panel proposals for presentation at 2015 Annual Meeting. Proposals on the Annual Meeting theme – “The United Nations at 70: Guaranteeing Security and Justice” – and on the subthemes and issues raised in the introductory note, in addition to other topics relating to the UN system and the broader mandate of the Council, will be considered.

Proposals:

In addition to individual workshop paper proposals addressing these and related matters, the ACUNS Secretariat this year will welcome a small number of special, full-panel proposals featuring ACUNS members reflecting on questions related specifically to marking the 70th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations.

Registration: Once your proposal is accepted you are required to register for the 2015 Annual Meeting at acuns.org/am2015

Current ACUNS members in good standing (including new or newly-renewed members) will be given priority consideration for their proposals, but non-members are welcome to submit proposals. NB In order to present at the AM15 workshops, Council membership will be required: this includes all persons participating in a full panel team proposal. The deadline for uploading your proposals is Monday, April 13, 2015. QUESTIONS? > Please contact the ACUNS Secretariat at admin@acuns.org or 226.772.3121 For general questions about the Council and its activities, please contact: Dr. Alistair D. Edgar, Executive Director, ACUNS, Wilfrid Laurier University T 226.772.3167 E aedgar@wlu.ca

Proposals will be accepted and evaluated, and panel spaces will be allotted, on a first-come rolling basis subsequent to the issuance of this Call. Once all panel spaces have been filled, a waiting list will be established for any subsequent proposals that are received.

Registration Fees are available online at acuns.org We will be filling workshops on a rolling basis. Once all spaces are filled there will be a waiting list for spaces.

A C U N S S E C R E T A R I A T > Wilfrid Laurier University, 75 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3C5 > T 226.772.3121 > F 226.772.3016

QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER Issue 1 > 2015 Academic Council on the United Nations System (ACUNS) Quarterly Newsletter is published four times a year with the support of the Department of Communications, Public Affairs & Marketing (CPAM) at Wilfrid Laurier University.

Publisher: Alistair Edgar, Executive Director, ACUNS

AC U N S S E C R E TA R I AT

Editor: Brenda Burns, Co-ordinator, ACUNS Contributing Writers: Jan Eliasson, Lassina Zerbo, Elham Seyedsayamdost, Alistair Edgar and Brenda Burns

Wilfrid Laurier University 75 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2L 3C5

Design: Dawn Wharnsby, CPAM

T > 226.772.3142

Imagery: Thinkstock, GraphicStock

F > 226.772.0016

We welcome and encourage your feedback. Opinions expressed in ACUNS Quarterly Newsletter do not necessarily reflect those of the editor, ACUNS or the host institution.

Send address changes and feedback to:

E > dkankesan@wlu.ca T > 226.772.3121

A C U N S Q UA R T E R LY N E W S L E T T E R

ISSUE 1

ACUNS.ORG

Denoja Kankesan, Administrative Assistant, ACUNS

2015

ACUNS.ORG 10

MEMBERSHIP FORM INDIVIDUAL ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP o New

o Renewal

M E M B E R I N F O R M AT I O N

Prefix: o Dr.

o Mr.

o Ms.

o Mrs.

o Miss

First Name: ___________________________________________ Last Name: ___________________________________________ Mailing Address:

o (Home) o (Work)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ City: _________________________________________________ State/Province: _______________________________________ Postal Code/Zip Code: ___________________________________ Country: _____________________________________________ E-mail (required for e-access): __________________________________________________________________________________ Telephone: ____________________________________________

o o o o

o (Home) o (Work) o (Mobile)

I would like to receive the ACUNS newsletter electronically I would like to receive the ACUNS e-update and receive free monthly updates on the latest news, events and activities I would like to receive information on ACUNS events & activities in Vienna I would like to receive information on ACUNS events in New York

2 M E M B E R S H I P T Y P E

Institutional Memberships also are available at acuns.org

ACUNS memberships are based on the January to December calendar year. If you join mid-year, you will receive back issues of Global Governance and the ACUNS quarterly newsletter. If you have any questions regarding joining mid-year, please contact the Secretariat at admin@acuns.org. Please note that membership fees are in U.S. Funds.

o $425 (Extended 5-year Term) o $70 (Up to $40,000 income)

o $155 (Sponsoring)* o $50 (Retired)

o $95 (Over $40,000 income) o $50 (Student)

*In addition to your own, sponsor a new one-year membership for a person from a developing country.

RETURN PAYMENT TO:

3 P A Y M E N T O P T I O N S

ACUNS SECRETARIAT

o VISA o MASTERCARD

Wilfrid Laurier University 75 University Avenue West

o Enclosed Check (drawn on a US or Canadian Bank)

Card No: ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____ / ____ ____ ____ ____

Waterloo, ON N2L 3C5 Canada

Expiration Date: ____ ____ / ____ ____ Signature:___________________________________________

OR Fax: (1) 226.772.0016

> For more information, please email admin@acuns.org or call (1) 226.772.3121

Email us to find out how to become an institutional member at admin@acuns.org

RENEW YOUR MEMBERSHIP OR BECOME A MEMBER ONLINE AT

ACUN S . O RG