ADEKEYE Adebajo gives a very misleading account of Boutros Boutros-Ghali. He was a man greatly and justly disliked, for whom few will mourn.
It is true, as Dr Adebajo says, that he was the first United Nations secretary-general to be booted out after just one term, and it is true that he was often very antiwestern and anti-American. It is also true that he refused to attend the informal meetings of the Security Council that all other secretaries-general had attended.
Dr Adebajo simply says he found these meetings "tedious" and seems to think that good enough. In fact, it was part of his job to do so and only an exceptionally arrogant man would have ignored that. Plainly put, it is the duty of any secretary-general to get on with all the great powers and not to pick and choose.
Thus Trygve Lie, the first secretary-general, got the sack in 1952, when the USSR vetoed him on the grounds that he had been too pro-American. China vetoed Kurt Waldheim in 1981, wanting someone more Third World. Boutros-Ghali was simply the first to be vetoed by the US (supported by the UK).
In power, Boutros-Ghali was an outrage. He was away from his office for months at a time.
He was on just such a tour as the situation deteriorated in Rwanda and his frantic staff found they could communicate with him only by fax.
In fact, as Egypt’s foreign minister, Boutros-Ghali had sold the Hutus most of the arms they used in the genocide in a secret arms deal. Boutros-Ghali confirmed all the worst fears about how an African might behave as secretary-general.
It took Kofi Annan to restore some semblance of respectability.
RW Johnson
Via e-mail
Boutros Boutros-Ghali. Picture: REUTERS/PAULO COCCO
ADEKEYE Adebajo gives a very misleading account of Boutros Boutros-Ghali. He was a man greatly and justly disliked, for whom few will mourn.
It is true, as Dr Adebajo says, that he was the first United Nations secretary-general to be booted out after just one term, and it is true that he was often very antiwestern and anti-American. It is also true that he refused to attend the informal meetings of the Security Council that all other secretaries-general had attended.
Dr Adebajo simply says he found these meetings "tedious" and seems to think that good enough. In fact, it was part of his job to do so and only an exceptionally arrogant man would have ignored that. Plainly put, it is the duty of any secretary-general to get on with all the great powers and not to pick and choose.
Thus Trygve Lie, the first secretary-general, got the sack in 1952, when the USSR vetoed him on the grounds that he had been too pro-American. China vetoed Kurt Waldheim in 1981, wanting someone more Third World. Boutros-Ghali was simply the first to be vetoed by the US (supported by the UK).
In power, Boutros-Ghali was an outrage. He was away from his office for months at a time.
He was on just such a tour as the situation deteriorated in Rwanda and his frantic staff found they could communicate with him only by fax.
In fact, as Egypt’s foreign minister, Boutros-Ghali had sold the Hutus most of the arms they used in the genocide in a secret arms deal. Boutros-Ghali confirmed all the worst fears about how an African might behave as secretary-general.
It took Kofi Annan to restore some semblance of respectability.
RW Johnson
Via e-mail
Change: 0.40%
Change: 0.47%
Change: -0.49%
Change: 0.53%
Change: 1.03%
Data supplied by Profile Data
Change: 1.71%
Change: 1.28%
Change: 0.40%
Change: 0.00%
Change: 1.64%
Data supplied by Profile Data
Change: -1.27%
Change: 0.00%
Change: 0.05%
Change: -0.08%
Change: 0.35%
Data supplied by Profile Data
Change: -0.02%
Change: 0.21%
Change: -0.06%
Change: 0.53%
Change: 0.70%
Data supplied by Profile Data