Wow, this was totally unexpected! What an awesome way to brand a country: leave it to two silly young women who know the ins and outs of Hollywood, but nothing about the rest of the world to create a favorable image of Pakistan in the minds of people who are least expected to care: young adults.
I saw the episode myself and couldnt stop laughing for most of the time, especially when Mr. Ghauri was trying to teach Paris and Nicole how to pray. Paris's excursion to the club was also wild, as was happily-married Mr. Ghauri's reaction to his surroundings: covering his eyes with his hands.
The end was the best. Mrs. Ghauri comes back home after a long day and presents Paris with a beautiful shawl and Paris returns the favor with a t-shirt that says "Pakistanis are hot".
In their individual comments, Paris and Nicole had extremely nice things to say about their experience. Paris even said that Pakistani men treat their wives like pricnesses.
All in all, it was good to see that while the mainstream media does not cover anything positive about Pakistan today, the entertainment world is actually making a change in the opposite direction. It also goes to show how the news business and show business are, in many ways, merging.
Enjoy this clip!
Saturday, June 17, 2006
Friday, June 16, 2006
Fireworks at the UN
First off, yes, I know it's been an entire week since i've posted, but you know what? I refuse to apologize this time! A lot has been going on, and every time I thought about updating my blog, I put it lower and lower on my priority list. Then I received some great feedback from people I didnt expect even read the blog often (thanks Nazia and Zoya!), so thanks for the always-appreciated encouragement and motivation. It's very kind of you.
So, today i'm going to post what I wrote in this week's column that I write for a Pakistani newspaper, The Post. I've been keeping an eye on the whole Brown-Bolton debate and how it has, in many ways, triggered an introspective, self-reflective debate within the community of international affairs experts as well as American policy-makers. What does it mean to be American and multilateral? How does a superpower engage the world? How does it "get things done" in the international arena? All these are valid questions that people from developing countries will be very interested in getting answers to.
Anyway, full text can be accessed here, while copied below are excerpts from the article, which is one of the longest i've ever written (almost 1100 words!):
The events that have transpired this past week at United Nations headquarters in New York City are testimony to the fact that New York does not have the best fireworks only on the fourth of July. With Deputy Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown’s comments at a conference being the ignition for the fireworks we witnessed, other events also took place which provided for some alternative jubilation.
The Deputy SG was speaking at a conference hosted by the prestigious think-tank, The Century Foundation and the Centre for American Progress, on “Power and Superpower in the 21st century”. Other speakers included America’s first female Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright (who recently published a book), as well as other scholars and government officials. One might ask then, why were Brown’s comments so noteworthy if people of such high calibre were in attendance? The answer lay in what Brown said regarding the United States’ role in international affairs and multilateralism, specifically the United Nations.
For those of who have been keeping a keen eye on UN affairs, we are well aware of the divisive role the current US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, is playing. Long before he assumed his responsibilities as Ambassador, Bolton had been quoted as saying that if 10 floors of the UN Secretariat were lost, “it wouldn’t make a bit of difference”. The audacity this man has! Well, it doesn’t end just here. After Brown made his speech at the conference, where he criticized the US’s position in the global diplomatic arena, he was lambasted by the American Ambassador. Brown’s comments were essentially very honest and truthful, nothing very harsh or extreme. In fact, the Financial Times of London went so far as to say “Mr Malloch Brown’s speech was a model of reasoned diplomacy” (June 9th, 2006).
Many international affairs experts have differing views on last week’s fireworks at the UN. Some say it was a much needed action, others say Bolton’s comments were taken out of context, while many others couldn’t care less, as the fiasco could be considered yet another PR stunt to raise UN-phobia in the halls of Congress. But who really knows what the future of such actions can be? Only time will tell…
But all fireworks are not harmful! Some can be seen in the night sky as symbols of a celebration in a land far, far, away. And while Bahrain might be close to Pakistan, it is far from those of us here in New York, USA. Does that stop us from celebrating the newly appointed President of the General Assembly (GA)? Not at all! Shaikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa of Bahrain is only the third woman and the first from the Middle East to hold the position. Incidentally, the first woman ever was Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit of India, who presided in 1953.
Shaikha Haya is a part of the Bahraini royal family and a pioneering lawyer and human rights activist, who happens to also be one of the first two women to ever practice law in Bahrain. One of her most important tasks as GA President will include the election of the new Secretary General, as well as negotiating between member states, much like her predecessor, Jan Eliasson of Sweden (now Foreign Minister), who brokered talks resulting in the creation of the Human Rights Council.
Shaikha Haya’s election doesn’t come as a surprise to me. The UN is quite an interesting place for women of Muslim heritage. Many of Middle Eastern and Muslim backgrounds have risen to high posts and have often been the first in the world to do so. Take Shaikha Haya’s example, as well as Nafis Sadik, who I’ve mentioned many times in this column before. Thoraya Obaid of Saudi Arabia, the Executive Director of the UN’s Population Fund is another shining example, as well as Mervat Tallawy of Egypt, who is the Executive Secretary of the UN’s Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA). The list goes on, and provides encouragement and motivation for all of us who think of ourselves as “minorities”, or the “underdog”. Only we can change this fate.
While the fireworks at the UN were not entirely harmful, they have set us on the right path.
With Shaikha Haya’s election as GA President, we have hope for a better future where Muslim women can play positive roles in societies all over the world, and not in just their own. With Brown’s comments and Bolton’s hyper-reaction, we have the opportunity to delve into some much needed introspection over the role of the US in today’s interdependent world. Is it destined to be an authoritative quasi-dictator, or can it be a responsible hegemon? We need a solution, but we must also realize that we are part of the solution.
So, today i'm going to post what I wrote in this week's column that I write for a Pakistani newspaper, The Post. I've been keeping an eye on the whole Brown-Bolton debate and how it has, in many ways, triggered an introspective, self-reflective debate within the community of international affairs experts as well as American policy-makers. What does it mean to be American and multilateral? How does a superpower engage the world? How does it "get things done" in the international arena? All these are valid questions that people from developing countries will be very interested in getting answers to.
Anyway, full text can be accessed here, while copied below are excerpts from the article, which is one of the longest i've ever written (almost 1100 words!):
The events that have transpired this past week at United Nations headquarters in New York City are testimony to the fact that New York does not have the best fireworks only on the fourth of July. With Deputy Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown’s comments at a conference being the ignition for the fireworks we witnessed, other events also took place which provided for some alternative jubilation.
The Deputy SG was speaking at a conference hosted by the prestigious think-tank, The Century Foundation and the Centre for American Progress, on “Power and Superpower in the 21st century”. Other speakers included America’s first female Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright (who recently published a book), as well as other scholars and government officials. One might ask then, why were Brown’s comments so noteworthy if people of such high calibre were in attendance? The answer lay in what Brown said regarding the United States’ role in international affairs and multilateralism, specifically the United Nations.
For those of who have been keeping a keen eye on UN affairs, we are well aware of the divisive role the current US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, is playing. Long before he assumed his responsibilities as Ambassador, Bolton had been quoted as saying that if 10 floors of the UN Secretariat were lost, “it wouldn’t make a bit of difference”. The audacity this man has! Well, it doesn’t end just here. After Brown made his speech at the conference, where he criticized the US’s position in the global diplomatic arena, he was lambasted by the American Ambassador. Brown’s comments were essentially very honest and truthful, nothing very harsh or extreme. In fact, the Financial Times of London went so far as to say “Mr Malloch Brown’s speech was a model of reasoned diplomacy” (June 9th, 2006).
Many international affairs experts have differing views on last week’s fireworks at the UN. Some say it was a much needed action, others say Bolton’s comments were taken out of context, while many others couldn’t care less, as the fiasco could be considered yet another PR stunt to raise UN-phobia in the halls of Congress. But who really knows what the future of such actions can be? Only time will tell…
But all fireworks are not harmful! Some can be seen in the night sky as symbols of a celebration in a land far, far, away. And while Bahrain might be close to Pakistan, it is far from those of us here in New York, USA. Does that stop us from celebrating the newly appointed President of the General Assembly (GA)? Not at all! Shaikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa of Bahrain is only the third woman and the first from the Middle East to hold the position. Incidentally, the first woman ever was Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit of India, who presided in 1953.
Shaikha Haya is a part of the Bahraini royal family and a pioneering lawyer and human rights activist, who happens to also be one of the first two women to ever practice law in Bahrain. One of her most important tasks as GA President will include the election of the new Secretary General, as well as negotiating between member states, much like her predecessor, Jan Eliasson of Sweden (now Foreign Minister), who brokered talks resulting in the creation of the Human Rights Council.
Shaikha Haya’s election doesn’t come as a surprise to me. The UN is quite an interesting place for women of Muslim heritage. Many of Middle Eastern and Muslim backgrounds have risen to high posts and have often been the first in the world to do so. Take Shaikha Haya’s example, as well as Nafis Sadik, who I’ve mentioned many times in this column before. Thoraya Obaid of Saudi Arabia, the Executive Director of the UN’s Population Fund is another shining example, as well as Mervat Tallawy of Egypt, who is the Executive Secretary of the UN’s Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA). The list goes on, and provides encouragement and motivation for all of us who think of ourselves as “minorities”, or the “underdog”. Only we can change this fate.
While the fireworks at the UN were not entirely harmful, they have set us on the right path.
With Shaikha Haya’s election as GA President, we have hope for a better future where Muslim women can play positive roles in societies all over the world, and not in just their own. With Brown’s comments and Bolton’s hyper-reaction, we have the opportunity to delve into some much needed introspection over the role of the US in today’s interdependent world. Is it destined to be an authoritative quasi-dictator, or can it be a responsible hegemon? We need a solution, but we must also realize that we are part of the solution.
Thursday, June 08, 2006
UN's Deputy SG in tussle with US Ambassador to UN
This John Bolton guy is getting on my nerves. I find it so irritating to hear his comments and thoughts on most everything related to diplomacy and multilateralism, and then even more so, his reactions to others' views on the same.
Take, for example, the recent speech delivered by the United Nation's Deputy Secretary General, Mark Malloch Brown, at a conference organized by The Century Foundation and the Center for American Progress titled "Power and Super-Power: Global Leadership in the Twenty-First Century". I had actually rsvp-ed for the conference, and was more than ready to attend, but the enthusiasm waned as I returned from a 12 AM free screening of The Omen the night before. (On a side note, the movie is worth seeing!)
Brown really doesnt say anything controversial. His viewpoints are quite reasonable and frankly, are honest and devoid of any sugar-coating. The why the harsh response from Bolton?
According to this Washington Post article, Bolton called Malloch Brown's speech a "very, very grave mistake," the worst by a U.N. official that he had seen in more than 15 years. He said the address, given in New York on Tuesday, represented a "condescending and patronizing" attack against the American people.
Thankfully, Annan categorically stood up for his number 2 at the UN, and immediately dismissed Bolton's almost vitriolic comments. It is true in many ways that the US has not only used the UN for its own interests, but then also gone further to derail efforts put forth by other member states when approached for cooperation. Maybe as a graduate student studying International Relations, I should teach Bolton a thing or two about diplomacy: it's a two way street, Mr. Ambassador!
For those who are interested, here's a full draft (PDF file) of the speech Brown delivered on Tuesday, but I have copied portions I found interesting below:
But my underlying message, which is a warning about the serious consequences of a decades-long tendency by US Administrations of both parties to engage only fitfully with the UN, is not one a sitting United Nations official would normally make to an audience like this.
Mark Malloch Brown is rightly pleading with the US to return to its first ideals as a nation -- those very values that impelled the nation to propose a UN in the first place and which convinced the American Senate to ratify the treaty 89-2 in July 1945.
Mr. Brown is to be commended now for asking us to once again show pride in -- as well as reassert our strong stewardship in -- the assembly that was "made in America."
More to follow, as developments emerge...
Take, for example, the recent speech delivered by the United Nation's Deputy Secretary General, Mark Malloch Brown, at a conference organized by The Century Foundation and the Center for American Progress titled "Power and Super-Power: Global Leadership in the Twenty-First Century". I had actually rsvp-ed for the conference, and was more than ready to attend, but the enthusiasm waned as I returned from a 12 AM free screening of The Omen the night before. (On a side note, the movie is worth seeing!)
Brown really doesnt say anything controversial. His viewpoints are quite reasonable and frankly, are honest and devoid of any sugar-coating. The why the harsh response from Bolton?
According to this Washington Post article, Bolton called Malloch Brown's speech a "very, very grave mistake," the worst by a U.N. official that he had seen in more than 15 years. He said the address, given in New York on Tuesday, represented a "condescending and patronizing" attack against the American people.
Thankfully, Annan categorically stood up for his number 2 at the UN, and immediately dismissed Bolton's almost vitriolic comments. It is true in many ways that the US has not only used the UN for its own interests, but then also gone further to derail efforts put forth by other member states when approached for cooperation. Maybe as a graduate student studying International Relations, I should teach Bolton a thing or two about diplomacy: it's a two way street, Mr. Ambassador!
For those who are interested, here's a full draft (PDF file) of the speech Brown delivered on Tuesday, but I have copied portions I found interesting below:
But my underlying message, which is a warning about the serious consequences of a decades-long tendency by US Administrations of both parties to engage only fitfully with the UN, is not one a sitting United Nations official would normally make to an audience like this.
But I feel it is a message that urgently needs to be aired. And as someone who has spent most of his adult life in this country, only a part of it at the UN, I hope you will take it in the spirit in which it is meant: as a sincere and constructive critique of US policy towards the UN by a friend and admirer. Because the fact is that the prevailing practice of seeking to use the UN almost by stealth as a diplomatic tool while failing to stand up for it against its domestic critics is simply not sustainable. You will lose the UN one way or another.
Today, we are coming to the end of the 10-year term of arguably the UN’s best-ever Secretary-General, Kofi Annan. But some of his very successes -- promoting human rights and a responsibility to protect people from abuse by their own Governments; creating a new status for civil society and business at the UN -- are either not recognized or have come under steady attacks from anti-UN groups.
More broadly, Americans complain about the UN’s bureaucracy, weak decision-making, the lack of accountable modern management structures and the political divisions of the General Assembly here in New York. And my response is, “guilty on all counts”. But why?
In significant part because the US has not stuck with its project -- its professed wish to have a strong, effective United Nations -- in a systematic way. Secretary Albright and others here today have played extraordinary leadership roles in US-UN relations, for which I salute them. But in the eyes of the rest of the world, US commitment tends to ebb much more than it flows. And in recent years, the enormously divisive issue of Iraq and the big stick of financial withholding have come to define an unhappy marriage.
As someone who deals with Washington almost daily, I know this is unfair to the very real effort all three Secretaries of State I have worked with –- Secretary Albright, Secretary Powell and Secretary Rice -– put into UN issues. And today, on a very wide number of areas, from Lebanon and Afghanistan to Syria, Iran and the Palestinian issue, the US is constructively engaged with the UN. But that is not well known or understood, in part because much of the public discourse that reaches the US heartland has been largely abandoned to its loudest detractors such as Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. That is what I mean by “stealth” diplomacy: the UN’s role is in effect a secret in Middle America even as it is highlighted in the Middle East and other parts of the world.
Exacerbating matters is the widely held perception, even among many US allies, that the US tends to hold on to maximalist positions when it could be finding middle ground.
We can see this even on apparently non-controversial issues such as renovating the dilapidated UN Headquarters in New York. While an architectural landmark, the building falls dangerously short of city codes, lacks sprinklers, is filled with asbestos and is in most respects the most hazardous workplace in town. But the only Government not fully supporting the project is the US. Too much unchecked UN-bashing and stereotyping over too many years -- manifest in a fear by politicians to be seen to be supporting better premises for overpaid, corrupt UN bureaucrats -- makes even refurbishing a building a political hot potato.
Last December, for example, largely at US insistence, instead of a normal two-year budget, Member States approved only six months’ worth of expenditure -- a period which ends on June 30. Developing and developed countries, the latter with the US at the fore, are now at loggerheads over whether sufficient reform has taken place to lift that cap, or indeed whether there should be any links between reform and the budget. Without agreement, we could face a fiscal crisis very soon.
There has been a significant amount of reform over the last 18 months, from the creation of a new Ethics Office and whistle-blower policy, to the establishment of a new Peacebuilding Commission and Human Rights Council. But not enough.
To be fair to Bolton, though, I must also copy some of his relevant comments. Full comments here.
Well, on that speech, this is a very, very grave mistake by the Deputy Secretary General. And to have the Deputy Secretary General criticize the United States in such a manner, can only do grave harm to the United Nations. Even though the target of the speech was the United States, the victim, I fear, will be the United Nations. And even worse was the condescending and patronizing tone about the American people. That fundamentally and very sadly, this was a criticism of the American people, not the American government, by an international civil servant, it's just illegitimate. But what we think the only way at this point to mitigate the damage to the United Nations is that the Secretary General Kofi Annan, we think has to personally and publicly repudiate this speech at the earliest possible opportunity. My hope is that he looks at the potential adverse effect that these intemperate remarks would have on the organization and repudiate it. I think that would be the cleanest, safest thing for the organization.
Mark Malloch Brown is rightly pleading with the US to return to its first ideals as a nation -- those very values that impelled the nation to propose a UN in the first place and which convinced the American Senate to ratify the treaty 89-2 in July 1945.
Mr. Brown is to be commended now for asking us to once again show pride in -- as well as reassert our strong stewardship in -- the assembly that was "made in America."
More to follow, as developments emerge...
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Asia in New York - Saturday, June 10th
Special Event:
Asia in New York
Asia in New York
| Date: Time: | June 10th 11:00 am - 4:00 pm |
| Location: | New York Asia Society and Museum, 725 Park Ave, New York |
| Cost: | Free admission. |
| Phone: | 212-517-ASIA |
It’s a party and you’re invited! Join us for a daylong open house in celebration of the wonderful diversity of New York and Asia Society’s 50th anniversary. There’s something for everyone with music, arts and crafts and much more. Watch a martial arts demonstration. Delight in masked dance. Explore your future through i-ching and astrology. Get free admission to a special tour of the exhibition A Passion for Asia: The Rockefeller Family Collects. Fun for the whole family. You won’t want to miss the festivities. Visit www.AsiaSociety.org for more details.
The Dragon Global Citizenship Programme Closing Ceremony - Monday, June 19
The Dragon Foundation
and
The Institute of International Education
Cordially Invite You to Attend The
2006 Closing Ceremony
of
The Dragon Global Citizenship Programme
******************************
Date: June 19, 2006
Time: 9:30 AM - 12:00 PM
Location: Institute of International Education
809 United Nations Plaza, 12th Floor Kauffman Conference Center
(First Avenue between 45th and 46th Streets)
******************************
Program
Lion Dance – Members of the Nai-Ni Chen Dance Company
Welcome – Dr. Allan Goodman, CEO, Institute of International Education
Dr. Rosanna Wong, DBE, JP; Director, The Dragon Foundation; Executive Director, The Hong Kong Federation of Youth Groups
Address by Guest of Honor – Ambassador Zhang Yishan, Deputy Permanent Representative to the U.N. from the People’s Republic of China (invited)
Solo Performance of The Long Spear Dance – Member of the Nai-Ni Chen Dance Company
Keynote Address – Mr. Nicholas Rostow, University Counsel & Vice Chancellor for Legal Affairs, The Levin Graduate Institute of International Relations and Commerce, and former General Counsel and Senior Policy Adviser to the US Permanent Representative, US Mission to the United Nations
Solo Performance of Indian Classical Bharata Natyam Dance - Romona Mukherjee
Awarding of Certificates in Global Citizenship – Dr. Rosanna Wong and Dr. Allan Goodman
Reception and Buffet Brunch
To R.S.V.P., please send an email with your name, title, organizational affiliation and guests' names to DragonGlobalCitizens@iie.org; For further information, call 212-984-5417. Please RSVP early, as space will be limited.
The Global Citizenship Program was created by The Dragon Foundation, in partnership with the Institute of International Education. The program identifies and rewards the academic excellence and leadership potential of undergraduate students, regardless of field of study, from universities in Hong Kong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)