Or will there be pressure to replace him with an Indian candidate, say Shashi Tharoor, or perhaps the first female?
I moved this to Great Debates because it’s an international issue. I don’t know much about the UN candidates but given the corruption allegations that were leveled against Tharoor recently, I’m guessing he is out of the running.
Given the recent shenanigans by North Korea, I think Ban Kimoon of South Korea will get a lot of sympathy votes.
Heh. Raises a point - how, exactly, does one campaign for this position?
One could imagine a world in which the campaign for Secretary-General could be quite interesting indeed. He’s not elected directly by the citizens of the UN member states, of course - but then, American Senators were originally elected by state legislatures (rather than the citizens), and our Presidents are still nominally elected by the Electoral College (though that’s more a fiction than anything else).
It would be interesting if candidates for the SG job felt a need to court popular support in democratic states, in the hopes that the citizens would pressure their governments.
Tremendously unlikely to ever happen, of course. Not least because the Secretary-General is an administrator and diplomat, with only a fairly limited capacity to steer policy. Shame, though - political campaigns are fine tools for educating and engaging the public.
Oh, it’s the U.S. Election forum.
My bad.
My recollection is that the UNSG typically gets two terms, with Boutros-Ghali being the major exception.
Ban will certainly seek a second term, but whether he gets it is far from certain.
The more relevant question is whether Asia will be given a second term (Kofi was chosen to succeed Boutros because he was also from Africa) or will another region, such as Latin America, put forward a candidate.
For more information on the process and potential candidates, see http://unelections.org, http://globalmemo.org, or (for the 2006 race) http://UNSG.org.
Is there any reason why he wouldn’t get a second term, as it’s traditionnally the case? I don’t remember him being considered as an utter failure or somesuch.
I don’t think he’s been either particularly good or shockingly bad. None of the five permanent Security Council members hate him, from what I’ve read. There’s no noticeably better diplomat vying to replace him. He hasn’t concealed a Nazi past.
So odds are he’ll have a second term if he wants it.
Actually, he was quite publicly (if accidentally) criticized for doing a horrible job in a leaked memo by the deputy ambassador from Norway last August, which noted how widely shared this view was. It also described how the U.S. government, who could veto a second term, was far from happy with Ban’s performance. And yes, there are others who are positioning themselves to launch a campaign if it appears that Ban won’t be re-nominated.
See “Is Ban Ki-Moon still a ‘one term SG’?” for more detail.