United Nations

The United Nations Organization (UNO) or simply the United Nations (UN) is an
international organization whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law,
international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achievement of
world peace. The UN was founded in 1945 after World War II to replace the League of Nations,
to stop wars between countries, and to provide a platform for dialogue. It contains multiple
subsidiary organizations to carry out its missions.

There are currently 192 member states, including nearly every sovereign state in the world. From
its offices around the world, the UN and its specialized agencies decide on substantive and
administrative issues in regular meetings held throughout the year. The organization has six
principal organs: the General Assembly (the main deliberative assembly); the Security Council
(for deciding certain resolutions for peace and security); the Economic and Social Council (for
assisting in promoting international economic and social cooperation and development); the
Secretariat (for providing studies, information, and facilities needed by the UN); the International
Court of Justice (the primary judicial organ); and the United Nations Trusteeship Council (which
is currently inactive). Other prominent UN System agencies include the World Health
Organization (WHO), the World Food Programme (WFP) and United Nations Children's Fund
(UNICEF). The UN's most visible public figure is the Secretary-General, currently Ban Ki-moon
of South Korea, who attained the post in 2007. The organization is financed from assessed and
voluntary contributions from its member states, and has six official languages: Arabic, Chinese,
English, French, Russian, and Spanish

History
Main article: History of the United Nations

The signing of the UN Charter in San Francisco, 1945.

The League of Nations failed to prevent World War II (1939–1945). Because of the widespread
recognition that humankind could not afford a Third World War, the United Nations was
established to replace the flawed League of Nations in 1945 in order to maintain international
peace and promote cooperation in solving international economic, social and humanitarian
problems. The earliest concrete plan for a new world organization was begun under the aegis of
the U.S. State Department in 1939. Franklin D. Roosevelt first coined the term 'United Nations'
as a term to describe the Allied countries. The term was first officially used on 1 January 1942,
when 26 governments signed the Atlantic Charter, pledging to continue the war effort.[3] On 25
April 1945, the UN Conference on International Organization began in San Francisco, attended
by 50 governments and a number of non-governmental organizations involved in drafting the
Charter of the United Nations. The UN officially came into existence on 24 October 1945 upon
ratification of the Charter by the five permanent members of the Security Council—France, the
Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States—and by a
majority of the other 46 signatories. The first meetings of the General Assembly, with 51 nations
represented, and the Security Council, took place in Westminster Central Hall in London in
January 1946.[4]

The organization was based at the Sperry Gyroscope Corporation's facility in Lake Success, New
York, from 1946–1952, before moving to the United Nations Headquarters building in
Manhattan upon its completion.

Since its creation, there has been controversy and criticism of the UN organization. In the United
States, an early opponent of the UN was the John Birch Society, which began a "get US out of
the UN" campaign in 1959, charging that the UN's aim was to establish a "One World
Government." After the Second World War, the French Committee of National Liberation was
late to be recognized by the US as the government of France, and so the country was initially
excluded from the conferences that aimed at creating the new organization. Charles de Gaulle
criticized the UN, famously calling it le machin ("the thingie"), and was not convinced that a
global security alliance would help maintain world peace, preferring direct defence treaties
between countries.[5]

Legal basis of establishment

Shortly after its establishment the UN sought recognition as an international legal person due to
the case of Reparations for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations[6] with the
advisory opinion delivered by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The question arose
whether the United Nations, as an organisation, had "the capacity to bring an international
claim* against a government regarding injuries that the organisation alleged had been caused by
that state."[7]

The Court stated : the Organization was intended to exercise and enjoy, and is in fact exercising
and enjoying functions and rights which can only be explained on the basis of the possession of a
large measure of international personality and the capacity to operate upon an international plane
... Accordingly, the Court has come to the conclusion that the Organization is an international
person. That is not the same thing as saying that it is a State, which it certainly is not, or that its
legal personality and rights and duties are the same as those of a State ... What it does mean is
that it is a subject of international law and capable of possessing international rights and duties,
and that it has capacity to maintain its rights by bringing international claims.[8]
Organization
Main article: United Nations System

The United Nations' system is based on five principal organs (formerly six–the Trusteeship
Council suspended operations in 1994, upon the independence of Palau, the last remaining UN
trustee territory);[9] the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC), the Secretariat, and the International Court of Justice.

Four of the five principal organs are located at the main United Nations headquarters located on
international territory in New York City. The International Court of Justice is located in The
Hague, while other major agencies are based in the UN offices at Geneva, Vienna, and Nairobi.
Other UN institutions are located throughout the world.

The six official languages of the United Nations, used in intergovernmental meetings and
documents, are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, and Spanish,[2]. The Secretariat uses
two working languages, English and French. Four of the official languages are the national
languages of the permanent members of the Security Council (the United Kingdom and the
United States share English as a de facto official language); Spanish and Arabic are the
languages of the two largest blocs of official languages outside of the permanent members
(Spanish being official in 20 countries, Arabic in 26). Five of the official languages were chosen
when the UN was founded; Arabic was added later in 1973. The United Nations Editorial
Manual states that the standard for English language documents is British usage and Oxford
spelling, the Chinese writing standard is Simplified Chinese. This replaced Traditional Chinese
in 1971 when the UN representation of China was changed from the Republic of China to the
People's Republic of China.

General Assembly

United Nations General Assembly hall.

Main article: United Nations General Assembly

The General Assembly is the main deliberative assembly of the United Nations. Composed of all
United Nations member states, the assembly meets in regular yearly sessions under a president
elected from among the member states. Over a two-week period at the start of each session, all
members have the opportunity to address the assembly. Traditionally, the Secretary-General
makes the first statement, followed by the president of the assembly. The first session was
convened on 10 January 1946 in the Westminster Central Hall in London and included
representatives of 51 nations.

When the General Assembly votes on important questions, a two-thirds majority of those present
and voting is required. Examples of important questions include: recommendations on peace and
security; election of members to organs; admission, suspension, and expulsion of members; and,
budgetary matters. All other questions are decided by majority vote. Each member country has
one vote. Apart from approval of budgetary matters, resolutions are not binding on the members.
The Assembly may make recommendations on any matters within the scope of the UN, except
matters of peace and security that are under Security Council consideration.

Conceivably, the one state, one vote power structure could enable states comprising just eight
percent of the world population to pass a resolution by a two-thirds vote (see List of countries by
population). However, as no more than recommendations, it is difficult to imagine a situation in
which a recommendation by member states constituting just eight percent of the world's
population, would be adhered to by the remaining ninety-two percent of the population, should
they object.

Security Council

United Nations Security Council chamber.

Main article: United Nations Security Council

The Security Council is charged with maintaining peace and security among countries. While
other organs of the United Nations can only make 'recommendations' to member governments,
the Security Council has the power to make binding decisions that member governments have
agreed to carry out, under the terms of Charter Article 25.[10] The decisions of the Council are
known as United Nations Security Council resolutions.

The Security Council is made up of 15 member states, consisting of 5 permanent members–

China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States–and 10 non-permanent
members, currently Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Gabon, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico,
Nigeria, Turkey, and Uganda. The five permanent members hold veto power over substantive but
not procedural resolutions allowing a permanent member to block adoption but not to block the
debate of a resolution unacceptable to it. The ten temporary seats are held for two-year terms
with member states voted in by the General Assembly on a regional basis. The presidency of the
Security Council is rotated alphabetically each month[11].
Secretariat
Main article: United Nations Secretariat

The United Nations Secretariat Building at the United Nations headquarters in New York City.

The United Nations Secretariat is headed by the Secretary-General, assisted by a staff of

international civil servants worldwide. It provides studies, information, and facilities needed by
United Nations bodies for their meetings. It also carries out tasks as directed by the UN Security
Council, the UN General Assembly, the UN Economic and Social Council, and other UN bodies.
The United Nations Charter provides that the staff be chosen by application of the "highest
standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity," with due regard for the importance of
recruiting on a wide geographical basis.

The Charter provides that the staff shall not seek or receive instructions from any authority other
than the UN. Each UN member country is enjoined to respect the international character of the
Secretariat and not seek to influence its staff. The Secretary-General alone is responsible for staff
selection.

The Secretary-General's duties include helping resolve international disputes, administering

peacekeeping operations, organizing international conferences, gathering information on the
implementation of Security Council decisions, and consulting with member governments
regarding various initiatives. Key Secretariat offices in this area include the Office of the
Coordinator of Humanitarian Affairs and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations. The
Secretary-General may bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter that, in his or her
opinion, may threaten international peace and security.

Secretary-General
Main article: Secretary-General of the United Nations
The current Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon of South Korea.

The Secretariat is headed by the Secretary-General, who acts as the de facto spokesperson and
leader of the UN. The current Secretary-General is Ban Ki-moon, who took over from Kofi
Annan in 2007 and will be eligible for reappointment when his first term expires in 2011.[12]

Envisioned by Franklin D. Roosevelt as a "world moderator", the position is defined in the UN

Charter as the organization's "chief administrative officer",[13] but the Charter also states that the
Secretary-General can bring to the Security Council's attention "any matter which in his opinion
may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security",[14] giving the position greater
scope for action on the world stage. The position has evolved into a dual role of an administrator
of the UN organization, and a diplomat and mediator addressing disputes between member states
and finding consensus to global issues.[12]

The Secretary-General is appointed by the General Assembly, after being recommended by the
Security Council, any member of which can veto,[15] and the General Assembly can theoretically
override the Security Council's recommendation if a majority vote is not achieved, although this
has not happened so far.[16] There are no specific criteria for the post, but over the years, it has
become accepted that the post shall be held for one or two terms of five years, that the post shall
be appointed on the basis of geographical rotation, and that the Secretary-General shall not
originate from one of the five permanent Security Council member states.[16]

Secretaries-General of the United Nations [17]

Country of
No. Name Took office Left office Note
origin

2 February 10 November Resigned; First Secretary-General

1 Trygve Lie  Norway
1946 1952 from Scandinavia

18 September
2 Dag Hammarskjöld  Sweden 10 April 1953 Died while in office
1961
 30 November
3 U Thant  Burma 1 January 1972 First Secretary-General from Asia
1961

4 Kurt Waldheim  Austria 1 January 1972 1 January 1982

Javier Pérez de First Secretary-General from

5  Peru 1 January 1982 1 January 1992
Cuéllar America

Boutros Boutros- First Secretary-General from

6  Egypt 1 January 1992 1 January 1997
Ghali Africa

7 Kofi Annan  Ghana 1 January 1997 1 January 2007

 South
8 Ban Ki-moon 1 January 2007 Incumbent
Korea

International Court of Justice

Peace Palace, seat of the International Court of Justice at The Hague, Netherlands.

Main article: International Court of Justice

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), located in The Hague, Netherlands, is the primary
judicial organ of the United Nations. Established in 1945 by the United Nations Charter, the
Court began work in 1946 as the successor to the Permanent Court of International Justice. The
Statute of the International Court of Justice, similar to that of its predecessor, is the main
constitutional document constituting and regulating the Court.[18]

It is based in the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, sharing the building with the Hague
Academy of International Law, a private centre for the study of international law. Several of the
Court's current judges are either alumni or former faculty members of the Academy. Its purpose
is to adjudicate disputes among states. The court has heard cases related to war crimes, illegal
state interference and ethnic cleansing, among others, and continues to hear cases.[19]

A related court, the International Criminal Court (ICC), began operating in 2002 through
international discussions initiated by the General Assembly. It is the first permanent international
court charged with trying those who commit the most serious crimes under international law,
including war crimes and genocide. The ICC is functionally independent of the UN in terms of
personnel and financing, but some meetings of the ICC governing body, the Assembly of States
Parties to the Rome Statute, are held at the UN. There is a "relationship agreement" between the
ICC and the UN that governs how the two institutions regard each other legally.[20]

Economic and Social Council

Main article: United Nations Economic and Social Council

The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) assists the General Assembly in promoting
international economic and social cooperation and development. ECOSOC has 54 members, all
of which are elected by the General Assembly for a three-year term. The president is elected for
a one-year term and chosen amongst the small or middle powers represented on ECOSOC.
ECOSOC meets once a year in July for a four-week session. Since 1998, it has held another
meeting each April with finance ministers heading key committees of the World Bank and the
International Monetary Fund (IMF). Viewed separate from the specialized bodies it coordinates,
ECOSOC's functions include information gathering, advising member nations, and making
recommendations. In addition, ECOSOC is well-positioned to provide policy coherence and
coordinate the overlapping functions of the UN’s subsidiary bodies and it is in these roles that it
is most active.

Specialized institutions
Main article: List of specialized agencies of the United Nations

There are many UN organizations and agencies that function to work on particular issues. Some
of the most well-known agencies are the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Food and
Agriculture Organization, UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization), the World Bank and the World Health Organization.

It is through these agencies that the UN performs most of its humanitarian work. Examples
include mass vaccination programmes (through the WHO), the avoidance of famine and
malnutrition (through the work of the WFP) and the protection of vulnerable and displaced
people (for example, by the UNHCR).

The United Nations Charter stipulates that each primary organ of the UN can establish various
specialized agencies to fulfil its duties.

Specialized agencies of the United Nations

Established
No. Acronyms Flag Agency Headquarters Head
in

Food and Agriculture

1 FAO Rome, Italy Jacques Diouf 1945
Organization

2 IAEA International Atomic Energy Vienna, Austria Yukiya 1957

 Agency Amano

International Civil Aviation Montreal, Raymond

3 ICAO 1947
Organization Canada Benjamin

International Fund for Kanayo F.

4 IFAD Rome, Italy 1977
Agricultural Development Nwanze

International Labour Geneva,

5 ILO Juan Somavía 1946 (1919)
Organization Switzerland

International Maritime London, Efthimios E.

6 IMO 1948
Organization United Kingdom Mitropoulos

Washington, Dominique
7 IMF International Monetary Fund 1945 (1944)
D.C., USA Strauss-Kahn

International Telecommunication Geneva, Hamadoun

8 ITU 1947 (1865)
Union Switzerland Touré

United Nations Educational,

9 UNESCO Scientific and Cultural Paris, France Irina Bokova 1946
Organization

United Nations Industrial Kandeh

10 UNIDO Vienna, Austria 1967
Development Organization Yumkella

Bern, Edouard
11 UPU Universal Postal Union 1947 (1874)
Switzerland Dayan

Washington, Robert B.
12 WB World Bank 1945 (1944)
D.C, USA Zoellick

Josette
13 WFP World Food Programme Rome, Italy 1963
Sheeran

Geneva, Margaret
14 WHO World Health Organization 1948
Switzerland Chan

World Intellectual Property Geneva,

15 WIPO Francis Gurry 1974
Organization Switzerland

World Meteorological Geneva, Alexander

16 WMO 1950 (1873)
Organization Switzerland Bedritsky
17 UNWTO World Tourism Organization Madrid, Spain Taleb Rifai 1974

Membership
Main article: United Nations member states

An animation showing the timeline of accession of UN member states, according to the UN. Note that
Antarctica has no government; political control of Western Sahara is in dispute; and the territories
administered by the Republic of China (Taiwan) and Kosovo are considered by the UN to be provinces of
the People's Republic of China and Republic of Serbia, respectively.

With the addition of Montenegro on 28 June 2006, there are currently 192 United Nations
member states, including all fully recognized independent states[21] apart from Vatican City (the
Holy See, which holds sovereignty over the state of Vatican City, is a permanent observer).[22]

The United Nations Charter outlines the rules for membership:

1. Membership in the United Nations is open to all other peace-loving states that accept the
obligations contained in the present Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able
and willing to carry out these obligations.
2. The admission of any such state to membership in the United Nations will be effected by a
decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.

—United Nations Charter, Chapter 2, Article 4, http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/

Group of 77

The Group of 77 at the UN is a loose coalition of developing nations, designed to promote its
members' collective economic interests and create an enhanced joint negotiating capacity in the
United Nations. There were 77 founding members of the organization, but the organization has
since expanded to 130 member countries. The group was founded on 15 June 1964 by the "Joint
Declaration of the Seventy-Seven Countries" issued at the United Nations Conference on Trade
and Development (UNCTAD). The first major meeting was in Algiers in 1967, where the
Charter of Algiers was adopted and the basis for permanent institutional structures was begun.[23]

Stated objectives
Peacekeeping and security
Main article: History of United Nations Peacekeeping

See also: List of United Nations peacekeeping missions

UN peacekeeping missions. Dark blue regions indicate current missions, while light blue regions
represent former missions.

The UN, after approval by the Security Council, sends peacekeepers to regions where armed
conflict has recently ceased or paused to enforce the terms of peace agreements and to
discourage combatants from resuming hostilities. Since the UN does not maintain its own
military, peacekeeping forces are voluntarily provided by member states of the UN. The forces,
also called the "Blue Helmets", who enforce UN accords, are awarded United Nations Medals,
which are considered international decorations instead of military decorations. The peacekeeping
force as a whole received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1988.

The founders of the UN had envisaged that the organization would act to prevent conflicts
between nations and make future wars impossible, however the outbreak of the Cold War made
peacekeeping agreements extremely difficult because of the division of the world into hostile
camps. Following the end of the Cold War, there were renewed calls for the UN to become the
agency for achieving world peace, as there are several dozen ongoing conflicts that continue to
rage around the globe.

A 2005 RAND Corp study found the UN to be successful in two out of three peacekeeping
efforts. It compared UN nation-building efforts to those of the United States, and found that
seven out of eight UN cases are at peace, as compared with four out of eight US cases at peace.
[24]
Also in 2005, the Human Security Report documented a decline in the number of wars,
genocides and human rights abuses since the end of the Cold War, and presented evidence, albeit
circumstantial, that international activism—mostly spearheaded by the UN—has been the main
cause of the decline in armed conflict since the end of the Cold War.[25] Situations where the UN
has not only acted to keep the peace but also occasionally intervened include the Korean War
(1950–1953), and the authorization of intervention in Iraq after the Persian Gulf War in 1990.
A British armoured car painted as it appeared while deployed on a UN peacekeeping mission.

The UN has also drawn criticism for perceived failures. In many cases, member states have
shown reluctance to achieve or enforce Security Council resolutions, an issue that stems from the
UN's intergovernmental nature—seen by some as simply an association of 192 member states
who must reach consensus, not an independent organization. Disagreements in the Security
Council about military action and intervention are seen as having failed to prevent the 1994
Rwandan Genocide,[26] failed to provide humanitarian aid and intervene in the Second Congo
War, failed to intervene in the 1995 Srebrenica massacre and protect a refugee haven by
authorizing peacekeepers to use force, failure to deliver food to starving people in Somalia,
failure to implement provisions of Security Council resolutions related to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, and continuing failure to prevent genocide or provide assistance in Darfur. UN
peacekeepers have also been accused of child rape, sexual abuse or soliciting prostitutes during
various peacekeeping missions, starting in 2003, in the Congo,[27] Haiti,[28][29] Liberia,[30] Sudan,[31]
Burundi and Côte d'Ivoire.[32] In 2004, former Israeli ambassador to the UN Dore Gold criticized
what it called the organization's moral relativism in the face of (and occasional support of)[33]
genocide and terrorism that occurred between the moral clarity of its founding period and the
present day. Gold specifically mentions Yasser Arafat's 1988 invitation to address the General
Assembly as a low point in the UN's history.[34]

In addition to peacekeeping, the UN is also active in encouraging disarmament. Regulation of

armaments was included in the writing of the UN Charter in 1945 and was envisioned as a way
of limiting the use of human and economic resources for the creation of them.[35] However, the
advent of nuclear weapons came only weeks after the signing of the charter and immediately
halted concepts of arms limitation and disarmament, resulting in the first resolution of the first
ever General Assembly meeting calling for specific proposals for "the elimination from national
armaments of atomic weapons and of all other major weapons adaptable to mass destruction".[36]
The principal forums for disarmament issues are the General Assembly First Committee, the UN
Disarmament Commission, and the Conference on Disarmament, and considerations have been
made of the merits of a ban on testing nuclear weapons, outer space arms control, the banning of
chemical weapons and land mines, nuclear and conventional disarmament, nuclear-weapon-free
zones, the reduction of military budgets, and measures to strengthen international security.
The UN is one of the official supporters of the World Security Forum, a major international
conference on the effects of global catastrophes and disasters, taking place in the United Arab
Emirates, in October 2008.

Human rights and humanitarian assistance

Eleanor Roosevelt with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1949.

The pursuit of human rights was a central reason for creating the UN. World War II atrocities
and genocide led to a ready consensus that the new organization must work to prevent any
similar tragedies in the future. An early objective was creating a legal framework for considering
and acting on complaints about human rights violations. The UN Charter obliges all member
nations to promote "universal respect for, and observance of, human rights" and to take "joint
and separate action" to that end. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, though not legally
binding, was adopted by the General Assembly in 1948 as a common standard of achievement
for all. The Assembly regularly takes up human rights issues.

The UN and its agencies are central in upholding and implementing the principles enshrined in
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. A case in point is support by the UN for countries in
transition to democracy. Technical assistance in providing free and fair elections, improving
judicial structures, drafting constitutions, training human rights officials, and transforming armed
movements into political parties have contributed significantly to democratization worldwide.
The UN has helped run elections in countries with little or no democratic history, including
recently in Afghanistan and East Timor. The UN is also a forum to support the right of women to
participate fully in the political, economic, and social life of their countries. The UN contributes
to raising consciousness of the concept of human rights through its covenants and its attention to
specific abuses through its General Assembly, Security Council resolutions, or International
Court of Justice rulings.

The purpose of the United Nations Human Rights Council, established in 2006,[37] is to address
human rights violations. The Council is the successor to the United Nations Commission on
Human Rights, which was often criticized for the high-profile positions it gave to member states
that did not guarantee the human rights of their own citizens.[38] The council has 47 members
distributed by region, which each serve three-year terms, and may not serve three consecutive
terms.[39] A candidate to the body must be approved by a majority of the General Assembly. In
addition, the council has strict rules for membership, including a universal human rights review.
While some members with questionable human rights records have been elected, it is fewer than
before with the increased focus on each member state's human rights record.[40]

The rights of some 370 million indigenous peoples around the world are also a focus for the UN,
with a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples being approved by the General Assembly
in 2007.[41] The declaration outlines the individual and collective rights to culture, language,
education, identity, employment and health, thereby addressing post-colonial issues that had
confronted indigenous peoples for centuries. The declaration aims to maintain, strengthen and
encourage the growth of indigenous institutions, cultures and traditions. It also prohibits
discrimination against indigenous peoples and promotes their active participation in matters that
concern their past, present and future.[41]

In conjunction with other organizations such as the Red Cross, the UN provides food, drinking
water, shelter and other humanitarian services to populaces suffering from famine, displaced by
war, or afflicted by other disasters. Major humanitarian branches of the UN are the World Food
Programme (which helps feed more than 100 million people a year in 80 countries), the office of
the High Commissioner for Refugees with projects in over 116 countries, as well as
peacekeeping projects in over 24 countries.

Social and economic development

Millennium Development Goals
1. eradicate extreme poverty and hunger;
2. achieve universal primary education;
3. promote gender equality and empower women;
4. reduce child mortality;
5. improve maternal health;
6. combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases;
7. ensure environmental sustainability; and
8. develop a global partnership for development.

The UN is involved in supporting development, e.g. by the formulation of the Millennium

Development Goals. The UN Development Programme (UNDP) is the largest multilateral source
of grant technical assistance in the world. Organizations like the World Health Organization
(WHO), UNAIDS, and The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria are leading
institutions in the battle against diseases around the world, especially in poor countries. The UN
Population Fund is a major provider of reproductive services.

The UN also promotes human development through various related agencies. The World Bank
Group and International Monetary Fund (IMF), for example, are independent, specialized
agencies and observers within the UN framework, according to a 1947 agreement. They were
initially formed as separate from the UN through the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1944.[42]

The UN annually publishes the Human Development Index (HDI), a comparative measure
ranking countries by poverty, literacy, education, life expectancy, and other factors.
The Millennium Development Goals are eight goals that all 192 United Nations member states
have agreed to try to achieve by the year 2015.[43] This was declared in the United Nations
Millennium Declaration, signed in September 2000.

Mandates
See also: Category:United Nations Security Council mandates

From time to time, the different bodies of the United Nations pass resolutions that contain
operating paragraphs that begin with the words "requests", "calls upon", or "encourages", which
the Secretary-General interprets as a mandate to set up a temporary organization or do
something. These mandates can be as little as researching and publishing a written report, or
mounting a full-scale peacekeeping operation (usually the exclusive domain of the Security
Council).

Although the specialized institutions, such as the WHO, were originally set up by this means,
they are not the same as mandates because they are permanent organizations that exist
independently of the UN with their own membership structure. One could say that original
mandate was simply to cover the process of setting up the institution, and has therefore long
expired. Most mandates expire after a limited time period and require renewal from the body,
which set them up.

One of the outcomes of the 2005 World Summit was a mandate (labelled id 17171) for the
Secretary-General to "review all mandates older than five years originating from resolutions of
the General Assembly and other organs". To facilitate this review and to finally bring coherence
to the organization, the Secretariat has produced an on-line registry of mandates to draw together
the reports relating to each one and create an overall picture.[44]

Other

Over the lifetime of the UN, over 80 colonies have attained independence.[45] The General
Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and
Peoples in 1960 with no votes against but abstentions from all major colonial powers. Through
the UN Committee on Decolonization,[46] created in 1962, the UN has focused considerable
attention on decolonization. It has also supported the new states that have arisen as a result of
self-determination initiatives. The committee has overseen the decolonization of every country
larger than 20,000 km² and removed them from the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing
Territories, besides Western Sahara, a country larger than the UK only relinquished by Spain in
1975.

The UN declares and coordinates international observances, periods of time to observe some
issue of international interest or concern. Using the symbolism of the UN, a specially designed
logo for the year, and the infrastructure of the United Nations System, various days and years
have become catalysts to advancing key issues of concern on a global scale. For example, World
Tuberculosis Day, Earth Day and International Year of Deserts and Desertification.
Funding
Top 10 donators to the UN budget, 2009 [47]

Member state Contribution

(% of UN budget)

 United States 22.00%

 Japan 16.624%

 Germany 8.577%

 United Kingdom 6.642%

 France 6.301%

 Italy 5.079%

 Canada 2.977%

 Spain 2.968%

 China 2.667%

 Mexico 2.257%

Other member states 23.908%

The UN is financed from assessed and voluntary contributions from member states. The regular
two-year budgets of the UN and its specialized agencies are funded by assessments. The General
Assembly approves the regular budget and determines the assessment for each member. This is
broadly based on the relative capacity of each country to pay, as measured by their Gross
National Income (GNI), with adjustments for external debt and low per capita income.[48]

The Assembly has established the principle that the UN should not be overly dependent on any
one member to finance its operations. Thus, there is a 'ceiling' rate, setting the maximum amount
any member is assessed for the regular budget. In December 2000, the Assembly revised the
scale of assessments to reflect current global circumstances. As part of that revision, the regular
budget ceiling was reduced from 25% to 22%. The U.S. is the only member that has met the
ceiling. In addition to a ceiling rate, the minimum amount assessed to any member nation (or
'floor' rate) is set at 0.001% of the UN budget. In addition, for the least developed countries
(LDC), a ceiling rate of 0.01% is applied.[48]
The current operating budget is estimated at $4.19 billion for the 2-year (biennial) period of 2008
to 2009, or a little over 2 billion dollars a year[48] (refer to table for major contributors).

A large share of UN expenditures addresses the core UN mission of peace and security. The
peacekeeping budget for the 2005–2006 fiscal year is approximately $5 billion (compared to
approximately $1.5 billion for the UN core budget over the same period), with some 70,000
troops deployed in 17 missions around the world.[49] UN peace operations are funded by
assessments, using a formula derived from the regular funding scale, but including a weighted
surcharge for the five permanent Security Council members, who must approve all peacekeeping
operations. This surcharge serves to offset discounted peacekeeping assessment rates for less
developed countries. As of 1 January 2008, the top 10 providers of assessed financial
contributions to United Nations peacekeeping operations were: the United States, Japan,
Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, China, Canada, Spain, and the Republic of Korea.
[50]

Special UN programmes not included in the regular budget (such as UNICEF, the WFP and
UNDP) are financed by voluntary contributions from other member governments. Most of this is
financial contributions, but some is in the form of agricultural commodities donated for afflicted
populations.

Because their funding is voluntary, many of these agencies suffer severe shortages during
economic recessions. In July 2009, the World Food Programme reported that it has been forced
to cut services because of insufficient funding.[51] It has received barely a quarter of the total it
needs for the 09/10 financial year.

Personnel policy

The UN and its agencies are immune to the laws of the countries where they operate,
safeguarding UN's impartiality with regard to the host and member countries.[52]

Despite their independence in matters of human resources policy, the UN and its agencies
voluntarily apply the laws of member states regarding same-sex marriages, allowing decisions
about the status of employees in a same-sex partnership to be based on nationality. The UN and
its agencies recognize same-sex marriages only if the employees are citizens of countries that
recognize the marriage. This practice is not specific to the recognition of same-sex marriage but
reflects a common practice of the UN for a number of human resources matters. It has to be
noted though that some agencies provide limited benefits to domestic partners of their staff and
that some agencies do not recognise same-sex marriage or domestic partnership of their staff.
[citation needed]

Reform
Main article: Reform of the United Nations
Proposed logo for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly, which would involve direct election of a
country's representative by its citizens.

Since its founding, there have been many calls for reform of the United Nations, although little
consensus on how to do so. Some want the UN to play a greater or more effective role in world
affairs, while others want its role reduced to humanitarian work.[53] There have also been
numerous calls for the UN Security Council's membership to be increased, for different ways of
electing the UN's Secretary-General, and for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly.

The UN has also been accused of bureaucratic inefficiency and waste. During the 1990s, the
United States withheld dues citing inefficiency, and only started repayment on the condition that
a major reforms initiative was introduced. In 1994, the Office of Internal Oversight Services
(OIOS) was established by the General Assembly to serve as an efficiency watchdog.[54]

An official reform programme was begun by Kofi Annan in 1997. Reforms mentioned include
changing the permanent membership of the Security Council (which currently reflects the power
relations of 1945), making the bureaucracy more transparent, accountable and efficient, making
the UN more democratic, and imposing an international tariff on arms manufacturers worldwide.
[citation needed]

In September 2005, the UN convened a World Summit that brought together the heads of most
member states, calling the summit "a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take bold decisions in
the areas of development, security, human rights and reform of the United Nations."[55] Kofi
Annan had proposed that the summit agree on a global "grand bargain" to reform the UN,
renewing the organization's focus on peace, security, human rights and development, and to
make it better equipped at facing 21st century issues. The World Summit Outcome Document
delineated the conclusions of the meeting, including: the creation of a Peacebuilding
Commission, to help countries emerging from conflict; a Human Rights Council and a
democracy fund; a clear and unambiguous condemnation of terrorism "in all its forms and
manifestations"; agreements to devote more resources to the Office of Internal Oversight
Services; agreements to spend billions more on achieving the Millennium Development Goals;
the dissolution of the Trusteeship Council, because of the completion of its mission; and, the
agreement that individual states, with the assistance of the international community, have the
"responsibility to protect" populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes
against humanity- with the understanding that the international community is prepared to act
"collectively" in a “timely and decisive manner” to protect vulnerable civilians should a state
"manifestly fail" in fulfilling its responsibility.[56]

The Office of Internal Oversight Services is being restructured to more clearly define its scope
and mandate, and will receive more resources. In addition, to improve the oversight and auditing
capabilities of the General Assembly, an Independent Audit Advisory Committee (IAAC) is
being created. In June 2007, the Fifth Committee created a draft resolution for the terms of
reference of this committee.[57][58] An ethics office was established in 2006, responsible for
administering new financial disclosure and whistleblower protection policies. Working with the
OIOS, the ethics office also plans to implement a policy to avoid fraud and corruption.[59] The
Secretariat is in the process of reviewing all UN mandates that are more than five years old. The
review is intended to determine which duplicative or unnecessary programmes should be
eliminated. Not all member states are in agreement as to which of the over 7000 mandates should
be reviewed. The dispute centres on whether mandates that have been renewed should be
examined.[60] Indeed, the obstacles identified – in particular, the lack of information on the
resource implications of each mandate – constituted sufficient justification for the General
Assembly to discontinue the mandate review in September 2008. In the meantime, the General
Assembly launched a number of new loosely related reform initiatives in April 2007, covering
international environmental governance, ‘Delivering as One’ at the country level to enhance the
consolidation of UN programme activities and a unified gender organization. Whereas little was
achieved on the first two issues, the General Assembly approved in September 2010 the
establishment of ‘UN Women’ as the new UN organization for gender equality and the
empowerment of women. UN Women was established by unifying the resources and mandates
of four small entities for greater impact and its first head is Ms. Michelle Bachelet, former
President of Chile.[citation needed]

Effectiveness

Some have questioned whether or not the UN might be relevant in the 21st century.[61] While the
UN’s first and second Charter mandates require the UN : “To maintain international peace and
security.... (and if necessary to enforce the peace by) taking preventive or enforcement action,”[62]
due to its restrictive administrative structure, the permanent members of the Security Council
themselves have sometimes prevented the UN from fully carrying out its first two mandates.[63]
Without the unanimous approval, support (or minimally abstention) of all 5 of the permanent
members of the UN's Security Council, the UN's charter only enables it to "observe", report on,
and make recommendations regarding international conflicts. Such unanimity on the Security
Council regarding the authorization of armed UN enforcement actions has not always been
reached in time to prevent the outbreak of international wars.[63] Even with all of these restraints
and limitations in place on the UN’s abilities to respond to situations of conflict, still various
studies have found the UN to have had many notable successes in the 65 years of its existence.

In 1962 UN secretary general U Thant provided valuable assistance and took a great deal of
time, energy and initiative as the primary negotiator between Nikita Khrushchev and John F.
Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, thus providing a critical link in the prevention of a
nuclear Armageddon at that time.[64] A 2005 RAND Corporation study found the UN to be
successful in two out of three peacekeeping efforts. It compared UN nation-building efforts to
those of the United States, and found that seven out of eight UN cases are at peace, as opposed to
four out of eight US cases at peace.[65] Also in 2005, the Human Security Report documented a
decline in the number of wars, genocides and human rights abuses since the end of the Cold War,
and presented evidence, albeit circumstantial, that international activism — mostly spearheaded
by the UN — has been the main cause of the decline in armed conflict since the end of the Cold
War.[66]

See also
United Nations portal

 Collective Security  United Nations Convention on the Law of

 High-level Panel on United Nations the Sea
Systemwide Coherence  United Nations elections and
 International relations appointments
 List of Permanent Representatives to the  United Nations Group of Experts on
United Nations Geographical Names (UNGEGN)
 Model United Nations  United Nations in popular culture
 Official statistics  United Nations International School
 UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador  United Nations Peace Messenger Cities
 UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador  United Nations Postal Administration
 Official languages of the United Nations  United Nations Security Council
 United Nations Association  United Nations University
 University for Peace
 World Heritage Site
 Yearbook of the United Nations
 Criticism of the United Nations

Relations between specific states and the United Nations

 Australia and the United Nations  Japan and the United Nations
 Brazil and the United Nations  Marshall Islands and the United Nations
 Canada and the United Nations  Micronesia and the United Nations
 China and the United Nations  New Zealand and the United Nations
 Fiji and the United Nations  Russia and the United Nations
 France and the United Nations  Soviet Union and the United Nations
 Activities of the Holy See within the United  United Kingdom and the United Nations
Nations system  United States and the United Nations
 India and the United Nations  Vanuatu and the United Nations
 Israel, Palestine, and the United Nations
World Health Organization
The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations (UN)
that acts as a coordinating authority on international public health. Established on April 7, 1948,
with headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, the agency inherited the mandate and resources of its
predecessor, the Health Organization, which was an agency of the League of Nations.
Contents
[hide]

 1 Constitution and history

o 1.1 Activities
 2 Structure
o 2.1 Regional offices
o 2.2 WHO liaison and other offices
o 2.3 Country offices
 3 People
o 3.1 Other
o 3.2 Staffing
 4 Controversies
o 4.1 Condoms and the Roman Catholic Church
o 4.2 Intermittent Preventive Therapy
 5 See also
 6 References
 7 External links

[edit] Constitution and history

The WHO's constitution states that its objective "is the attainment by all people of the highest
possible level of health."[1] Its major task is to combat disease, especially key infectious diseases,
and to promote the general health of the people of the world.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is one of the original agencies of the United Nations, its
constitution formally coming into force on the first World Health Day, (April 7, 1948), when it
was ratified by the 26th member state. Jawarharlal Nehru, a major freedom fighter of India had
given an opinion to start WHO.[2] Prior to this its operations, as well as the remaining activities of
the League of Nations Health Organization, were under the control of an Interim Commission
following an International Health Conference in the summer of 1946.[3] The transfer was
authorized by a Resolution of the General Assembly.[4] The epidemiological service of the
French Office International d'Hygiène Publique was incorporated into the Interim Commission
of the World Health Organization on January 1, 1947.[5]

[edit] Activities

Apart from coordinating international efforts to control outbreaks of infectious disease, such as
SARS, malaria, Tuberculosis, swine flu, and AIDS the WHO also sponsors programmes to
prevent and treat such diseases. The WHO supports the development[6][7] and distribution of
safe and effective vaccines, pharmaceutical diagnostics, and drugs. After over two decades of
fighting smallpox, the WHO declared in 1980 that the disease had been eradicated – the first
disease in history to be eliminated by human effort.
The WHO aims to eradicate polio within the next few years. The organization has already
endorsed the world's first official HIV/AIDS Toolkit for Zimbabwe (from 3 October 2006),
making it an international standard.[8]

In addition to its work in eradicating disease, the WHO also carries out various health-related
campaigns — for example, to boost the consumption of fruits and vegetables worldwide and to
discourage tobacco use. Experts met at the WHO headquarters in Geneva in February, 2007, and
reported that their work on pandemic influenza vaccine development had achieved encouraging
progress. More than 40 clinical trials have been completed or are ongoing. Most have focused on
healthy adults. Some companies, after completing safety analysis in adults, have initiated clinical
trials in the elderly and in children. All vaccines so far appear to be safe and well-tolerated in all
age groups tested.[9]

The WHO also promotes the development of capacities in Member States to use and produce
research that addresses national needs, by bolstering national health research systems and
promoting knowledge translation platforms such as the Evidence Informed Policy Network
-EVIPNet. WHO and its regional offices are working to develop regional policies on research for
health -the first one being the Regional Office for the Americas PAHO/AMRO that had its
Policy on Research for Health approved in September 2009 by its 49th Directing Council
Document CD 49.10.

WHO also conducts health research in communicable diseases, non-communicable conditions

and injuries; for example, longitudinal studies on ageing to determine if the additional years we
live are in good or poor health, and, whether the electromagnetic field surrounding cell phones
has an impact on health. Some of this work can be controversial, as illustrated by the April,
2003, joint WHO/FAO report, which recommended that sugar should form no more than 10% of
a healthy diet. This report led to lobbying by the sugar industry against the recommendation,[10]
to which the WHO/FAO responded by including in the report the statement "The Consultation
recognized that a population goal for free sugars of less than 10% of total energy is
controversial", but also stood by its recommendation based upon its own analysis of scientific
studies.[11]

The World Health Organization's suite of health studies is working to provide the needed health
and well-being evidence through a variety of data collection platforms, including the World
Health Survey covering 308,000 respondents aged 18+ years and 81,000 aged 50+ years from 70
countries and the Study on Global Aging and Adult Health (SAGE) covering over 50,000
persons aged 50+ across almost 23 countries. The World Mental Health Surveys, WHO Quality
of Life Instrument, WHO Disability Assessment Scales provide guidance for data collection in
other health and health-related areas. Collaborative efforts between WHO and other agencies,
such as the Health Metrics Network and the International Household Surveys Network, serve the
normative functions of setting high research standards.

WHO has also worked on global initiatives in surgery such as the Global Initiative for
Emergency and Essential Surgical Care[6] and the Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care[7]
focussed on access and quality. Safe Surgery Saves Lives[8] addresses the safety of surgical care.
The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist is in current use worldwide in the effort to improve safety in
surgical patients.

[edit] Structure

World Health Organization:

  member states

  associate member territories

  observers

  invited delegations

WHO Headquarters in Geneva

Members of the WHO are 191 of the UN members, the Cook Islands and Niue.

Non-state territories of UN Member States may join as Associate Members (with full
information but limited participation and voting rights) if approved by an Assembly vote: Puerto
Rico and Tokelau are Associate Members.[9]

The following states and entities were granted observer status: Palestine[10] (a UN observer),
Holy See[11] (UN observer), Order of Malta[11] (UN observer) and Chinese Taipei[12] (an invited
delegation).
Non-members of the WHO are Liechtenstein and the rest of states with limited recognition.
[weasel  words]

WHO Member States appoint delegations to the World Health Assembly, WHO's supreme
decision-making body. All UN member states are eligible for WHO membership, and, according
to the WHO web site, “Other countries may be admitted as members when their application has
been approved by a simple majority vote of the World Health Assembly.”

The WHO Assembly generally meets in May each year. In addition to appointing the Director-
General every five years, the Assembly considers the financial policies of the Organization and
reviews and approves the proposed programme budget. The Assembly elects 34 members,
technically qualified in the field of health, to the Executive Board for three-year terms. The main
functions of the Board are to carry out the decisions and policies of the Assembly, to advise it
and to facilitate its work in general.

The WHO is financed by contributions from member states and donors. In recent years, the
WHO's work has involved increasing collaboration with external bodies; there are currently
around 80 partnerships ("official relations" and "working relations")[11] with NGOs and the
pharmaceutical industry, as well as with foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. Voluntary contributions to the WHO from national
and local governments, foundations and NGOs, other UN organizations, and the private sector,
now exceed that of assessed contributions (dues) from the 193 member nations.[13]PDF (30.1 KB)

In addition to the observer states and entities listed above the UN observer organizations ICRC
and IFRCRCS have entered into "official relations" with the WHO and are invited as observers.
In the World Health Assembly they are seated along the other NGOs.[11]

[edit] Regional offices

Regional offices and regions of the WHO:

  Africa; HQ: Brazzaville, Congo

  Americas; HQ: Washington, D.C., USA

  Eastern Med.; HQ: Cairo, Egypt

  Europe; HQ: Copenhagen, Denmark

  South East Asia; HQ: New Delhi, India

  Western Pacific; HQ: Manila, Philippines

Uncharacteristically for a UN Agency, the six Regional Offices of the WHO enjoy remarkable
autonomy. Each Regional Office is headed by a Regional Director (RD), who is elected by the
Regional Committee for a once-renewable five-year term. The name of the RD-elect is
transmitted to the WHO Executive Board in Geneva, which proceeds to confirm the
appointment. It is rare that an elected Regional Director is not confirmed.

Each Regional Committee of the WHO consists of all the Health Department heads, in all the
governments of the countries that constitute the Region. Aside from electing the Regional
Director, the Regional Committee is also in charge of setting the guidelines for the
implementation, within the region, of the Health and other policies adopted by the World Health
Assembly. The Regional Committee also serves as a progress review board for the actions of the
WHO within the Region.

The Regional Director is effectively the head of the WHO for his or her Region. The RD
manages and/or supervises a staff of health and other experts at the regional headquarters and in
specialized centres. The RD is also the direct supervising authority—concomitantly with the
WHO Director General—of all the heads of WHO country offices, known as WHO
Representatives, within the Region.

The Regional Offices are:

 Regional Office for Africa (AFRO)I, with headquarters in Brazzaville, Republic of Congo. AFRO
includes most of Africa, with the exception of Egypt, Sudan, Tunisia, Libya, Somalia and
Morocco, which belong to EMRO.[14]
 Regional Office for Europe (EURO), with headquarters in Copenhagen, Denmark.
 Regional Office for South East Asia (SEARO), with headquarters in New Delhi, India. North Korea
is served by SEARO.
 Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean (EMRO), with headquarters in Cairo, Egypt. EMRO
includes the countries of Africa, and particularly in the Maghreb, that are not included in AFRO,
as well as the countries of the Middle East, except for Israel. Pakistan is served by EMRO.
 Regional Office for Western Pacific (WPRO), with headquarters in Manila, Philippines. WPRO
covers all the Asian countries not served by SEARO and EMRO, and all the countries in Oceania.
South Korea is served by WPRO.
 Regional Office for the Americas (AMRO), with headquarters in Washington, D.C., USA. It is
better known as the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO). Since it predates the
establishment of WHO, PAHO is by far the most autonomous of the 6 regional offices.

[edit] WHO liaison and other offices

WHO has a number of specialist offices/agencies, as well as liaison offices at the most important
international institutions.[15]
  IARC, International Agency for Research on Cancer (Lyon, France)
 WHO Centre for Health Development – WHO Kobe Center (Kobe, Japan)
 WHO Lyon Office for National Epidemic Preparedness and Response (LYO) (Lyon, France)
 WHO Mediterranean Centre for Vulnerability Reduction (Tunisia)
 WHO Office at the African Union and the Economic Commission for Africa (Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia)
 WHO Liaison Office in Washington (USA)
 WHO Office at the European Union (Brussels, Belgium)
 WHO Office at the United Nations (New York, USA)
 WHO Office at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (Washington, USA)

[edit] Country offices

The World Health Organization operates 147 country and liaison offices in all its regions. The
presence of a country office is generally motivated by a need, stated by the member country.
There will generally be one WHO country office in the capital, occasionally accompanied by
satellite-offices in the provinces or sub-regions of the country in question.

The country office is headed by a WHO Representative (WR), who is a trained physician, not a
national of that country, who holds diplomatic rank and is due privileges and immunities similar
to those of an Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary. In most countries, the WR (like
Representatives of other UN agencies) is de facto and/or de jure treated like an Ambassador –
the distinction here being that instead of being an Ambassador of one sovereign country to
another, the WR is a senior UN civil servant, who serves as the "Ambassador" of the WHO to
the country to which he or she is accredited. Hence, the title of Resident Representative, or
simply Representative. The WR is member of the UN system country Team which is coordinated
by the UN system resident Coordinator.

The country office consists of the WR, and several health and other experts, both foreign and
local, as well as the necessary support staff. The main functions of WHO country offices include
being the primary adviser of that country's government in matters of health and pharmaceutical
policies.

International liaison offices serve largely the same purpose as country offices, but generally on a
smaller scale. These are often found in countries that want WHO presence and cooperation, but
do not have the major health system flaws that require the presence of a full-blown country
office. Liaison offices are headed by a liaison officer, who is a national from that particular
country, without diplomatic immunity.

[edit] People
[edit] Other

Nancy Brinker was appointed Goodwill Ambassador for Cancer Control by Director-General
Margaret Chan on May 26, 2009.
[edit] Staffing

The World Health Organization is an agency of the United Nations and as such shares a core of
common personnel policy with other agencies.

The World Health Organization has recently banned the recruitment of cigarette smokers, to
promote the principle of a tobacco-free work environment.The World Health
Organization(WHO) successfully rallied 168 countries to sign the Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control in 2003.[16] The Convention is designed to push for effective legislation and its
enforcement in all countries to reduce the harmful effects of tobacco. On August 28, 2005, the
National People’s Congress of China signed the Convention.

[edit] Controversies

Demonstration on Chernobyl disaster day near WHO in Geneva[clarification needed]

[edit] Condoms and the Roman Catholic Church

Main article: Roman Catholic Church and AIDS

In 2003, the WHO denounced the Roman Curia's health department, saying: "These incorrect
statements about condoms and HIV are dangerous when we are facing a global pandemic which
has already killed more than 20 million people, and currently affects at least 42 million."[17]

[edit] Intermittent Preventive Therapy

The aggressive support of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for intermittent preventive
therapy which included the commissioning a report from the Institute of Medicine triggered a
memo from the former WHO malaria chief Dr. Akira Kochi.[18] Dr. Kochi wrote, “although it
was less and less straightforward that the health agency should recommend IPTi, the agency’s
objections were met with intense and aggressive opposition from Gates-backed scientists and the
foundation”.
[edit] See also
United Nations portal

 Alliance for Healthy Cities

 Health Sciences Online – a virtual learning resources center from the WHO
 Hideyo Noguchi Africa Prize
 Open Learning for Development

World Food Programme

The World Food Programme (WFP) is the food aid branch of the United Nations, and the
world's largest humanitarian organization addressing hunger worldwide.[1] WFP provides food,
on average, to 90 million people per year, 58 million of whom are children.[2] From its
headquarters in Rome and more than 80 country offices around the world, WFP works to help
people who are unable to produce or obtain enough food for themselves and their families.

Contents
[hide]

 1 Overview
o 1.1 Organization
o 1.2 Goals and strategies
 2 Activities
o 2.1 Myanmar
 3 Funding
 4 FITTEST (Fast IT and Telecommunications Emergency and Support Team)
 5 Official partners
 6 World Hunger Relief Week
 7 Grassroots efforts
 8 World Food Program USA
 9 Criticisms
 10 See also
 11 References
 12 External links

[edit] Overview

The WFP was first established at the 1960 Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)
Conference, when George McGovern, director of the US Food for Peace Programmes, proposed
establishing a multilateral food aid programme.[3] WFP was formally established in 1963 by the
FAO and the United Nations General Assembly on a three-year experimental basis. In 1965, the
programme was extended to a continuing basis.

[edit] Organization

The WFP is governed by an Executive Board which consists of representatives from 36 member
states. Josette Sheeran is the current Executive Director, appointed jointly by the UN Secretary
General and the Director-General of the FAO for a five-year term. She heads the Secretariat of
WFP.[4]

WFP has a staff of 9,139 people (2007) with 90% operating in the field.[5]
[edit] Goals and strategies

WFP strives to eradicate hunger and malnutrition, with the ultimate goal in mind of eliminating
the need for food aid itself.

The core strategies behind WFP activities, according to its mission statement, are to provide food
aid to:

1. save lives in refugee and other emergency situations

2. improve the nutrition and quality of life of the most vulnerable people at critical times in their
lives
3. help build assets and promote the self-reliance of poor people and communities, particularly
through labour-intensive works programmes

WFP food aid is also directed to fight micronutrient deficiencies, reduce child mortality, improve
maternal health, and combat disease, including HIV and AIDS. Food-for-work programmes help
promote environmental and economic stability and agricultural production.

[edit] Activities

In 2006, WFP distributed 4 million metric tons of food to 87.8 million people in 78 countries;
63.4 million beneficiares were aided in emergency operations, including victims of conflict,
natural disasters and economic failure in countries like Somalia, Lebanon, and Sudan. Direct
expenditures reached US$2.9 billion, with the most money being spent on Emergency
Operations and Immediate Response Account. WFP’s largest country operation in 2006 was
Sudan, where the Programme reached 6.4 million people. The second and third largest WFP
operations were, respectively, Ethiopia and Kenya. In 2007, WFP's Sudan operation will require
some US$ 685 million to provide food assistance to 5.5 million people (2.8 million in Darfur
alone).

Not all food aid is international. Sometimes the World Food Program with the help of numerous
NGOs organizes food distribution within a country. In Sudan, for instance, the WFP buys about
100,000 metric tons of food – mostly sorghum – from the country's own production in the
eastern and central part of the country. That amount constituted one-sixth of the annual
requirement of 632,000 metric tons for 2008.[6]

WFP focuses its food assistance on those who are most vulnerable to hunger, which most
frequently means women, children, the sick and the elderly. In fact, part of the response to the
2010 Haiti earthquake consisted of distributing food aid to women as exprerience built up over
almost 5 decades of working in emergency situations has demonstrated that giving food to
women helps to ensure that it is spread evenly among all household members. In 2005, food
assistance was provided to 58.2 million children, 30 percent of whom were under five. In 2006,
WFP assisted 58.8 million hungry children. School-feeding and/or take home ration programmes
in 71 countries help students focus on their studies and encourage parents to send their children,
especially girls, to school.
[edit] Myanmar
Main article: United Nations World Food Programme in Myanmar

During the 2007 Burmese anti-government protests the United Nations reported that food
shipments out of Mandalay Division to half a million people in the northern districts were being
disrupted.[7] This problem added the shortage of funding over its three year operation and the
poverty caused by the government's eradication of opium farming. Military cooperation with the
food shipments was quickly resumed.[8]

See also: "where we work" by WFP

[edit] Funding

WFP operations are funded by donations from world governments, corporations and private
donors. In 2006, the Programme received $2.9 billion in contributions. All donations are
completely voluntary. The organization's administrative costs are only seven percent—one of the
lowest and best among aid agencies. On 6 November 2006, Josette Sheeran was appointed to
replace James T. Morris as Executive Director of WFP by the Secretary-General of the UN and
Director-General of FAO in April 2007. Previously, Sheeran served as the Under Secretary for
Economic, Business, and Agricultural Affairs United States Department of State and as the
managing editor of the Washington Times.

In July 2009, the agency reported that it was forced to cut services due to insufficient funding.[9]
These include regions of Uganda, Chad, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast and Guinea. The
BBC reports that this shortfall is due to the current economic crisis which has increased the
number of people in need and reduced the amount richer nations are willing to donate. The
agency says it needs $6.7 billion in the current financial year. However, UN members have
promised only $3.7 billion, and have actually provided only $1.8 billion, barely a quarter of the
total the WFP asked for.

[edit] FITTEST (Fast IT and Telecommunications Emergency and Support

Team)
FITTEST in Port au Prince during the 2010 Haiti earthquake emergency response

The Fast Information Technology and Telecommunications Emergency and Support Team
(FITTEST), is a group of technical specialists within the IT (information technology) division of
the World Food Programme (WFP).[10] FITTEST provides IT, telecommunications and electricity
infrastructure to support humanitarian aid operations anywhere in the world.

Humanitarian emergencies demand rapid interventions that are efficient, coordinated and
effective. FITTEST responds to emergency requests and ensures staff are on the ground and
ready to operate within 48 hours.

FITTEST is based in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The geographical location of this city
facilitates the team’s deployment to emergencies around the world.

Operating on a cost-recovery basis, FITTEST is a unique cell within the United Nations system.
Receiving no direct contribution from Governments or other humanitarian donors, FITTEST
ensures its sustainability by operating in a similar way to a commercial company. The team
operates on a limited margin (7.5%) which it uses to cover costs and initial training for its
members. Such a method of operating ensures the application of very high service standards as
FITTEST only survives if its 'clients' continue to utilise its services.

[edit] Official partners

Italian €2 commemorative coin of 2004 celebrating the WFP

WFP coordinates and cooperates with a number of official partners in emergencies and
development projects. These partners include national government agencies such as DFID,
ECHO, EUROPEAID, USAID; UN agencies such as the Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD); non-governmental
organizations such as Save the Children, Catholic Relief Services and Norwegian Refugee
Council; as well as corporate partners such as TNT N.V., YUM! Brands, DSM N.V., and Cargill.
[11]
You can also donate grains of rice by answering questions at www.freerice.com. For each
question you get correct you donate 10 grains of rice.
[edit] World Hunger Relief Week

In 2007, the World Food Programme joined forces with YUM! Brands, the world’s largest
restaurant company, to launch the first annual World Hunger Relief Week, a global campaign to
increase awareness about hunger, engage volunteers, and raise critically needed funds to help
WFP serve the world's areas of greatest need. World Hunger Relief Week 2007 leveraged the
power of nearly 35,000 restaurants around the world, sparking a global movement to end hunger
and generating an overwhelming outpouring of support from millions of customers, employees,
franchisees and their families. Nearly one million Yum!, KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, Long John
Silver's and A&W All American Food employees, franchisees and their families volunteered
close to 4 million hours to aid hunger relief efforts in communities worldwide, while helping to
raise $16 million throughout the World Hunger Relief Week initiative for the World Food
Programme and other hunger relief agencies around the world.

[edit] Grassroots efforts

In 2004, the WFP tasked Auburn University in Auburn, Alabama, US, with heading the first
student-led War on Hunger effort, after a 2002 Northwestern University pilot. Auburn founded
the Committee of 19, which has not only led campus and community hunger awareness events
but also developed a War on Hunger model for use on campuses across the country.

WFP has launched a global advocacy and fundraising event called Walk the World. On one
single day each year, hundreds of thousands of people in every time zone all over the world walk
to call for the end of child hunger. In 2005, more than 200,000 people walked in 296 locations.
In 2006, there were 760,000 participants in 118 countries all over the world. This event is part of
the campaign to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, specifically to halve the number of
people who suffer from hunger and poverty by 2015.

A growing number of grassroots global events and celebrations such as International Day of
Peace, World Party Day participants, and Peace One Day recommend WFP on radio broadcasts
as an immediate reach out action, putting help within reach of anyone with the information that a
quarter feeds a child for a day. Fill the Cup campaign takes just 25 US cents to fill one of the
"red cups" that the World Food Programme uses to give hungry children a regular school meal of
porridge, rice or beans.[12][13][14] Drew Barrymore and Sean Penn are among notable celebrities
who endorse WFP.[15]

In 2006, the Committee of 19 hosted a War on Hunger Summit at which representatives from 29
universities were in attendance. At this summit, the model for a student-led War on Hunger
initiative was presented with strong support.

[edit] World Food Program USA

World Food Program USA (formerly Friends of WFP) is an advocacy and fundraising charity
that supports the WFP in the United States.[16]
[edit] Criticisms

According to a leaked March 2010 UN report, up to half of the food aid going to Somalia has
been diverted to corrupt contractors and militants.

United Nations Security Council

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is one of the principal organs of the United
Nations and is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. Its powers,
outlined in the United Nations Charter, include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the
establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization of military action. Its powers are
exercised through United Nations Security Council resolutions.

The Security Council held its first session on 17 January 1946 at Church House, London. Since
its first meeting, the Council, which exists in continuous session, has travelled widely, holding
meetings in many cities, such as Paris and Addis Ababa, as well as at its current permanent home
in the United Nations building in New York City.

There are 15 members of the Security Council, consisting of five veto-wielding permanent
members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and 10 elected
non-permanent members with two-year terms. This basic structure is set out in Chapter V of the
UN Charter. Security Council members must always be present at UN headquarters in New York
so that the Security Council can meet at any time. This requirement of the United Nations
Charter was adopted to address a weakness of the League of Nations since that organization was
often unable to respond quickly to a crisis.
Contents
[hide]

 1 Members
o 1.1 Permanent members
o 1.2 Non-permanent members
 2 President
 3 Veto power
 4 Status of non-members
 5 Role
o 5.1 Responsibility to protect
 6 Resolutions
 7 Criticism
 8 Membership reform
 9 Chamber
 10 See also
 11 References
 12 Further reading
 13 External links

[edit] Members
[edit] Permanent members

Leaders of the five permanent member states at a summit in 2000. Clockwise from front left: Chinese
President Jiang Zemin, U.S. President Bill Clinton, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Russian President
Vladimir Putin, and French President Jacques Chirac.

See also: China and the United Nations, France and the United Nations, Russia and the United Nations,
Soviet Union and the United Nations, United Kingdom and the United Nations, and United States and
the United Nations
The Security Council's five permanent members have the power to veto any substantive
resolution:

  China[1]
  France[2]
  Russia[3]
  United Kingdom
  United States

The five permanent members (also known as the P5 or Big 5) of the Security Council consisted
of France, the Republic of China, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the USSR, at the
UN's founding in 1946. With the exception of the People's Republic of China (which replaced
the Republic of China in 1971), and Russia (which superseded the Soviet Union seat in 1991),
the current P5 membership were all drawn from the victorious powers of World War II.

There have been two seat changes since then, although not reflected in Article 23 of the Charter
of the United Nations as it has not been accordingly amended:

 China's seat was originally filled by the Republic of China, but due to the stalemate of the
Chinese Civil War in 1949, there have been two states claiming to represent China since then,
and both officially claim each other's territory. In 1971, the People's Republic of China was
awarded China's seat in the United Nations by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, and the
Republic of China (based in Taiwan) soon lost membership in all UN organizations.
 Russia, being the legal successor state to the Soviet Union after the latter's collapse in 1991,
acquired the originally-Soviet seat, including the Soviet Union's former representation in the
Security Council.

The five permanent members of the Security Council are also the only countries recognized as
nuclear-weapon states (NWS) under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. However,
membership of the UN Security Council is not dependent on nuclear weapons status.

The Permanent Representatives of the U.N. Security Council permanent members are Li
Baodong (China), Gérard Araud (France), Vitaly Churkin (Russia), Mark Lyall Grant (United
Kingdom), and Susan Rice (United States).[4]

[edit] Non-permanent members

See also: List of members of the United Nations Security Council, United Nations Security Council
election, 2009, and United Nations Security Council election, 2010

Ten other members are elected by the General Assembly for two-year terms starting on 1
January, with five replaced each year. The members are chosen by regional groups and
confirmed by the United Nations General Assembly. The African bloc chooses three members;
the Latin America and the Caribbean, Asian, and Western European and Others blocs choose two
members each; and the Eastern European bloc chooses one member. Also, one of these members
is an "Arab country," alternately from the Asian or African bloc.[5]
The current elected members, with the regions they were elected to represent and their
Permanent Representatives, are:

1 January 2010 – 31 December 2011 1 January 2011 – 31 December 2012

Regional Permanent Regional Permanent

Country Country
bloc(s) Representative bloc(s) Representative

 Bosnia and Eastern Latin America Néstor Osorio

Ivan Barbalić  Colombia
Herzegovina Europe and Caribbean Londoño

Latin America Maria Luiza Ribeiro Western

 Brazil
and Caribbean Viotti  Germany Europe and Peter Wittig
Other
Emmanuel Issoze-
 Gabon Africa
Ngondet  India Asia Hardeep Singh Puri

Asia and Arab Western

 Lebanon Nawaf Salam José Filipe Moraes
group  Portugal Europe and
Cabral
Other
 Nigeria Africa Joy Ogwu
 South
Africa Baso Sangqu
Africa

[edit] President
Main article: President of the United Nations Security Council

The role of president of the Security Council involves setting the agenda, presiding at its
meetings and overseeing any crisis. The President is authorized to issue both presidential
statements (subject to consensus among Council members) and notes,[6][7] which are used to make
declarations of intent that the full Security Council can then pursue.[7] The Presidency rotates
monthly in alphabetical order of the Security Council member nations' names in English and is
currently held by Bosnia and Herzegovina for the month of January 2011.[8]

[edit] Veto power

Number of resolutions vetoed by each of the five permanent members of the Security Council between
1946 and 2007.[9]

Main article: United Nations Security Council veto power

Under Article 27 of the UN Charter, Security Council decisions on all substantive matters
require the affirmative votes of nine members. A negative vote, or veto, also known as the rule of
"great Power unanimity", by a permanent member prevents adoption of a proposal, even if it has
received the required number of affirmative votes (9). Abstention is not regarded as a veto
despite the wording of the Charter. Since the Security Council's inception, China (ROC/PRC)
has used its veto 6 times; France 18 times; Russia/USSR 123 times; the United Kingdom 32
times; and the United States 82 times. The majority of Russian/Soviet vetoes were in the first ten
years of the Council's existence. Since 1984, China and France have vetoed three resolutions
each; Russia/USSR four; the United Kingdom ten; and the United States 43.

Procedural matters are not subject to a veto, so the veto cannot be used to avoid discussion of an
issue.

[edit] Status of non-members

A state that is a member of the UN, but not of the Security Council, may participate in Security
Council discussions in matters by which the Council agrees that the country's interests are
particularly affected. In recent years, the Council has interpreted this loosely, allowing many
countries to take part in its discussions. Non-members are routinely invited to take part when
they are parties to disputes being considered.

[edit] Role

Under Chapter Six of the Charter, "Pacific Settlement of Disputes", the Security Council "may
investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to
a dispute". The Council may "recommend appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment" if it
determines that the situation might endanger international peace and security. These
recommendations are not binding on UN members.

Under Chapter Seven, the Council has broader power to decide what measures are to be taken in
situations involving "threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression". In such
situations, the Council is not limited to recommendations but may take action, including the use
of armed force "to maintain or restore international peace and security". This was the basis for
UN armed action in Korea in 1950 during the Korean War and the use of coalition forces in Iraq
and Kuwait in 1991. Decisions taken under Chapter Seven, such as economic sanctions, are
binding on UN members.
Then-United States Secretary of State Colin Powell holds a model vial of anthrax while giving a
presentation to the United Nations Security Council in February 2003. Foreign ministers and heads of
government sometimes appear in the UNSC in person to discuss issues.

The UN's role in international collective security is defined by the UN Charter, which gives the
Security Council the power to:

 Investigate any situation threatening international peace;

 Recommend procedures for peaceful resolution of a dispute;
 Call upon other member nations to completely or partially interrupt economic relations as well
as sea, air, postal, and radio communications, or to sever diplomatic relations;
 Enforce its decisions militarily, or by any means necessary;
 Avoid conflict and maintain focus on cooperation.

They also recommend the new Secretary-General to the General Assembly.[10]

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court recognizes that the Security Council has
authority to refer cases to the Court, where the Court could not otherwise exercise jurisdiction.[11]
The Council exercised this power for the first time in March 2005, when it referred to the Court
“the situation prevailing in Darfur since 1 July 2002”;[12] since Sudan is not a party to the Rome
Statute, the Court could not otherwise have exercised jurisdiction.

[edit] Responsibility to protect

Security Council Resolution 1674, adopted on 28 April 2006, "reaffirms the provisions of
paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document regarding the
responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes
against humanity".[13] The resolution commits the Council to action to protect civilians in armed
conflict.

[edit] Resolutions
Main article: United Nations Security Council resolution

The UN Charter is a multilateral treaty. It is the constitutional document that distributes powers
and functions among the various UN organs. It authorizes the Security Council to take action on
behalf of the members, and to make decisions and recommendations. The Charter mentions
neither binding nor non-binding resolutions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory
opinion in the 1949 "Reparations" case indicated that the United Nations Organization had both
explicit and implied powers. The Court cited Articles 104 and 2(5) of the Charter, and noted that
the members had granted the Organization the necessary legal authority to exercise its functions
and fulfill its purposes as specified or implied in the Charter, and that they had agreed to give the
United Nations every assistance in any action taken in accordance with the Charter.[14]

Article 25 of the Charter says that "The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry
out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter". The Repertory
of Practice of United Nations Organs, is a UN legal publication that is published by the
Secretariat units concerned in accordance with their operational responsibilities and under the
guidance of the Inter-Departmental Committee on Charter Repertory. It says that during the
United Nations Conference on International Organization which met in San Francisco in 1945,
attempts to limit obligations of Members under Article 25 of the Charter to those decisions taken
by the Council in the exercise of its specific powers under Chapters VI, VII and VIII of the
Charter failed. It was stated at the time that those obligations also flowed from the authority
conferred on the Council under Article 24(1) to act on the behalf of the members while
exercising its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.[15] Article 24,
interpreted in this sense, becomes a source of authority which can be drawn upon to meet
situations which are not covered by the more detailed provisions in the succeeding articles.[16]
The Repertory on Article 24 says: "The question whether Article 24 confers general powers on
the Security Council ceased to be a subject of discussion following the advisory opinion of the
International Court of Justice rendered on 21 June 1971 in connection with the question of
Namibia (ICJ Reports, 1971, page 16)".[17]

In exercising its powers the Security Council seldom bothers to cite the particular article or
articles of the UN Charter that its decisions are based upon. In cases where none are mentioned,
a constitutional interpretation is required.[18] This sometimes presents ambiguities as to what
amounts to a decision as opposed to a recommendation, and also the relevance and interpretation
of the phrase "in accordance with the present Charter".[19]

In the preliminary rulings of the "Lockerbie" cases[20] the ICJ held that the provisions of the
Montreal Convention could be preempted by Security Council resolutions pursuant to Article 25
and Article 103 of the UN Charter. Article 103 provides that in the event of conflicts with other
treaty obligations, the members obligations under the Charter prevail. There is consensus that the
treaty-based powers of the Security Council are limited to preemption of other treaties. The UN
cannot circumvent peremptory norms and its resolutions are subject to judicial review.[21]

UN Security Council Resolutions

Sources:
UN Security Council · UNBISnet · Wikisource

1 to 100 (1946–1953)
 101 to 200 (1953–1965)

201 to 300 (1965–1971)

301 to 400 (1971–1976)

401 to 500 (1976–1982)

501 to 600 (1982–1987)

601 to 700 (1987–1991)

701 to 800 (1991–1993)

801 to 900 (1993–1994)

901 to 1000 (1994–1995)

1001 to 1100 (1995–1997)

1101 to 1200 (1997–1998)

1201 to 1300 (1998–2000)

1301 to 1400 (2000–2002)

1401 to 1500 (2002–2003)

1501 to 1600 (2003–2005)

1601 to 1700 (2005–2006)

1701 to 1800 (2006–2008)

1801 to 1900 (2008–2009)

1901 to 2000 (2009–present)

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Portal:United Nations Security Council Resolutions

Security Council Resolutions are legally binding if they are made under Chapter VII (Action
with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression) of the
Charter.

There is a general agreement among legal scholars outside the organization that resolutions made
under Chapter VI (Pacific Settlement of Disputes) are not legally binding.[22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]
One argument is that since they have no enforcement mechanism, except self-help, they may not
be legally binding.[31] Some States give constitutional or special legal status to the UN Charter
and Security Council resolutions. In such cases non-recognition regimes or other sanctions can
be implemented under the provisions of the laws of the individual member states.[32]

The Repertory of Practice of United Nations Organs was established because "Records of the
cumulating practice of international organizations may be regarded as evidence of customary
international law with reference to States' relations to the organizations."[33] The repertory cites
the remarks made by the representative of Israel, Mr Eban, regarding a Chapter VI resolution. He
maintained that the Security Council's resolution of 1 September 1951 possessed, within the
meaning of Article 25, a compelling force beyond that pertaining to any resolution of any other
organ of the United Nations, in his view the importance of the resolution had to be envisaged in
the light of Article 25, under which the decisions of the Council on matters affecting
international peace and security assumed an obligatory character for all Member States. The
Egyptian representative disagreed.[34]

Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali related that during a press conference his remarks
about a "non-binding" resolution started a dispute. His assistant released a hasty clarification
which only made the situation worse. It said that the Secretary had only meant to say that
Chapter VI contains no means of insuring compliance and that resolutions adopted under its
terms are not enforceable. When the Secretary finally submitted the question to the UN Legal
Advisor, the response was a long memo the bottom line of which read, in capital letters: "NO
SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION CAN BE DESCRIBED AS UNENFORCEABLE." The
Secretary said "I got the message."[35]

Prof. Jared Schott explains that "Though certainly possessing judicial language, without the
legally binding force of Chapter VII, such declarations were at worst political and at best
advisory".[36]

In 1971, a majority of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) members in the Namibia advisory
opinion held that the resolution contained legal declarations that were made while the Council
was acting on behalf of the members in accordance with Article 24. The Court also said that an
interpretation of the charter that limits the domain of binding decision only to those taken under
Chapter VII would render Article 25 "superfluous, since this [binding] effect is secured by
Articles 48 and 49 of the Charter", and that the "language of a resolution of the Security Council
should be carefully analysed before a conclusion can be made as to its binding effect".[37] The ICJ
judgment has been criticized by Erika De Wet and others.[38] De Wet argues that Chapter VI
resolutions cannot be binding. Her reasoning, in part states:

Allowing the Security Council to adopt binding measures under Chapter VI would undermine
the structural division of competencies foreseen by Chapters VI and VII, respectively. The whole
aim of separating these chapters is to distinguish between voluntary and binding measures.
Whereas the pacific settlement of disputes provided by the former is underpinned by the consent
of the parties, binding measures in terms of Chapter VII are characterized by the absence of such
consent. A further indication of the non-binding nature of measures taken in terms of Chapter VI
is the obligation on members of the Security Council who are parties to a dispute, to refrain from
voting when resolutions under Chapter VI are adopted. No similar obligation exists with respect
to binding resolutions adopted under Chapter VII... If one applies this reasoning to the Namibia
opinion, the decisive point is that none of the Articles under Chapter VI facilitate the adoption of
the type of binding measures that were adopted by the Security Council in Resolution
276(1970)... Resolution 260(1970) was indeed adopted in terms of Chapter VII, even though the
ICJ went to some length to give the opposite impression.[39]

Others disagree with this interpretation. Professor Stephen Zunes asserts that "[t]his does not
mean that resolutions under Chapter VI are merely advisory, however. These are still directives
by the Security Council and differ only in that they do not have the same stringent enforcement
options, such as the use of military force".[40] Former President of the International Court of
Justice Rosalyn Higgins argues that the location of Article 25, outside of Chapter VI and VII and
with no reference to either, suggests its application is not limited to Chapter VII decisions.[41] She
asserts that the Travaux préparatoires to the UN Charter "provide some evidence that Article 25
was not intended to be limited to Chapter VII, or inapplicable to Chapter VI."[42] She argues that
early state practice into what resolutions UN members considered binding has been somewhat
ambiguous, but seems to "rely not upon whether they are to be regarded as "Chapter VI or
"Chapter VII" resolutions [...] but upon whether the parties intended them to be "decisions" or
"recommendations" ... One is left with the view that in certain limited, and perhaps rare, cases a
binding decision may be taken under Chapter VI".[43] She supports the view of the ICJ that
"clearly regarded Chapters VI, VII, VIII and XII as lex specialis while Article 24 contained the
lex generalis ... [and] that resolutions validly adopted under Article 24 were binding on the
membership as a whole".[44]

Those resolutions made dealing with the internal governance of the organization (such as the
admission of new Member States) are legally binding where the Charter gives the Security
Council power to make them.

If the council cannot reach consensus or a passing vote on a resolution, they may choose to
produce a non-binding presidential statement instead of a Resolution. These are adopted by
consensus. They are meant to apply political pressure — a warning that the council is paying
attention and further action may follow.

Press statements typically accompany both resolutions and presidential statements, carrying the
text of the document adopted by the body and also some explanatory text. They may also be
released independently, after a significant meeting.

[edit] Criticism
Main article: Criticism of the United Nations

A concern has been raised that this section's Criticism section may be compromising the
article's neutral point of view of the subject. Possible resolutions may be to integrate the
material in the section into the article as a whole, or to rewrite the contents of the section.
Please see the discussion on the talk page. (December 2009)
 This article may be unbalanced towards certain viewpoints. Please improve the article by
adding information on neglected viewpoints, or discuss the issue on the talk page. (August 2010)

There has been criticism that the five permanent members of the United Nations Security
Council, who are all nuclear powers, have created an exclusive nuclear club that only addresses
the strategic interests and political motives of the permanent members; for example, protecting
the oil-rich Kuwaitis in 1991 but poorly protecting resource-poor Rwandans in 1994.[45] Critics
have suggested that the number of permanent members should be expanded to include non-
nuclear powers,[46] or abolishing the concept of permanency altogether.[47]

Another criticism of the Security Council involves the veto power of the five permanent nations;
a veto from any of the permanent members may cripple any possible UN armed or diplomatic
response to a crisis. John J. Mearsheimer claimed that "since 1982, the US has vetoed 32
Security Council resolutions critical of Israel, more than the total number of vetoes cast by all the
other Security Council members."[48] The practice of the permanent members meeting privately
and then presenting their resolutions to the full council as a fait accompli has also drawn fire.[49]

Other critics and even proponents of the Security Council question its effectiveness and
relevance because in most high-profile cases, there are essentially no consequences for violating
a Security Council resolution. During the Darfur crisis, Janjaweed militias, allowed by elements
of the Sudanese government, committed violence against an indigenous population, killing
thousands of civilians. In the Srebrenica massacre, Serbian troops committed genocide against
Bosniaks, although Srebrenica had been declared a UN "safe area" and was even protected by
400 armed Dutch peacekeepers.[citation needed]

Other critics call the UN undemocratic, representing the interests of the governments of the
nations who form it and not necessarily the individuals within those nations. The UN Charter
gives all three powers of the legislative, executive, and judiciary branches to the Security
Council.[50]

Another concern is that the five permanent members of the UN Security Council are five of the
top ten largest arms exporting countries in the world.[51]

The amount of time devoted to the Israeli-Arab conflict in the UNSC has been described as
excessive by some pro-Israel political organizations and academics, like United Nations Watch,
[52]
the Anti-Defamation League,[53] Alan Dershowitz,[54] Martin Kramer, and Mitchell Bard. This
“excessiveness" is partially due to the existence of UN Security Council Resolution number 1322
(2000) of 7 October 2000 that serves the legal basis for a monthly discussion on this protracted
conflict. Paragraph 7 stated that “invites the Secretary-General to continue to follow the situation
and to keep the Security Council informed.” In accordance with its general practices, it is
considered that this issue has to be dealt on a regular basis i.e. every month. The resolution was
adopted with 14 affirmative votes and one abstention (i.e. USA).

[edit] Membership reform

Main article: Reform of the United Nations Security Council
The G4 nations: Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan. Most support one another's bids for permanent seats
on the Security Council, though are heavily opposed by various member nations of the UN.

There has been discussion of increasing the number of permanent members. The countries who
have made the strongest demands for permanent seats are Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan.
Japan and Germany are the UN's second and third largest funders respectively, while Brazil and
India are two of the largest contributors of troops to UN-mandated peace-keeping missions. This
proposal has found opposition in a group of countries called Uniting for Consensus.

Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan asked a team of advisers to come up with

recommendations for reforming the United Nations by the end of 2004. One proposed measure is
to increase the number of permanent members by five, which, in most proposals, would include
Brazil, Germany, India, Japan (known as the G4 nations), one seat from Africa (most likely
between Egypt, Nigeria or South Africa) and/or one seat from the Arab League.[55] On 21
September 2004, the G4 nations issued a joint statement mutually backing each other's claim to
permanent status, together with two African countries. Currently the proposal has to be accepted
by two-thirds of the General Assembly (128 votes).

The permanent members, each holding the right of veto, announced their positions on Security
Council reform reluctantly. The United States has unequivocally supported the permanent
membership of Japan and lent its support to India and a small number of additional non-
permanent members. The United Kingdom and France essentially supported the G4 position,
with the expansion of permanent and non-permanent members and the accession of Germany,
Brazil, India and Japan to permanent member status, as well as an increase the presence by
African countries on the Council. China has supported the stronger representation of developing
countries (Brazil and India), and firmly opposed Japan's membership.[56]

[edit] Chamber

The designated Security Council Chamber in the United Nations Conference Building, designed
by the Norwegian architect Arnstein Arneberg, was the specific gift of Norway. The mural
painted by the Norwegian artist Per Krohg depicts a phoenix rising from its ashes, symbolic of
the world reborn after World War II. In the blue and gold silk tapestry on the walls and in the
draperies of the windows overlooking the East River appear the anchor of faith, the wheat stems
of hope, and the heart of charity.
United Nations Development Programme
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is the United Nations' global
development network. It advocates for change and connects countries to knowledge, experience
and resources to help people build a better life. UNDP operates in 166 countries, working with
nations on their own solutions to global and national development challenges. As they develop
local capacity, they draw on the people of UNDP and its wide range of partners.
UNDP is an executive board within the United Nations General Assembly. The UNDP
Administrator is the third highest ranking official of the United Nations after the United Nations
Secretary-General and Deputy Secretary-General.

Headquartered in New York City, the UNDP is funded entirely by voluntary contributions from
member nations. The organization has country offices in 166 countries, where it works with local
governments to meet development challenges and develop local capacity. Additionally, the
UNDP works internationally to help countries achieve the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs).

UNDP provides expert advice, training, and grant support to developing countries, with
increasing emphasis on assistance to the least developed countries. To accomplish the MDGs and
encourage global development, UNDP focuses on poverty reduction, HIV/AIDS, democratic
governance, energy and environment, social development, and crisis prevention and recovery.
UNDP also encourages the protection of human rights and the empowerment of women in all of
its programs.

Furthermore, UNDP publishes an annual Human Development Report to measure and analyze
developmental progress. In addition to a global Report, UNDP publishes regional, national, and
local Human Development Reports.
Contents
[hide]

 1 History
 2 Budget
 3 Functions
o 3.1 Human Development Report
 4 UN co-ordination role
o 4.1 Disarmament and controversy
o 4.2 United Nations Development Group
o 4.3 Resident Coordinator System
 5 Criticism
 6 Administrator
o 6.1 Administrator
o 6.2 Associate Administrator
o 6.3 Assistant Administrators
o 6.4 Previous Administrators
 7 Goodwill Ambassadors
o 7.1 Global Ambassadors
o 7.2 Regional Goodwill Ambassador
o 7.3 Honorary Human Development Ambassador
o 7.4 Honorary Advisor on Sports and Development
o 7.5 Youth Emissaries
 8 See also
 9 References
 10 External links

[edit] History
Main article: United Nations

The UNDP was founded in 1965 to combine the Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance
and the United Nations Special Fund. In 1971, the two organizations were fully combined into
the UNDP.

[edit] Budget

In 2008, UNDP’s entire budget was approximately $5 billion.

[edit] Functions

UNDP’s offices and staff are on the ground in 166 countries, working with governments and
local communities to help them find solutions to global and national development challenges.
UNDP links and coordinates global and national efforts to achieve the goals and national
development priorities laid out by host countries. UNDP focuses primarily on five
developmental challenges:

Democratic governance UNDP supports national democratic transitions by providing policy

advice and technical support, improving institutional and individual capacity within countries,
educating populations about and advocating for democratic reforms, promoting negotiation and
dialogue, and sharing successful experiences from other countries and locations. UNDP also
supports existing democratic institutions by increasing dialogue, enhancing national debate, and
facilitating consensus on national governance programs. This field of activity included UNDP's
support of the Elections Reform Support Group which supports the election activities of the
Palestinian National Authority.[2]

Poverty reduction UNDP helps countries develop strategies to combat poverty by expanding
access to economic opportunities and resources, linking poverty programs with countries’ larger
goals and policies, and ensuring a greater voice for the poor. UNDP also works at the macro
level to reform trade, encourage debt relief and foreign investment, and ensure the poorest of the
poor benefit from globalisation.

On the ground, UNDP sponsors developmental pilot projects, promotes the role of women in
development, and coordinates efforts between governments, NGOs, and outside donors. In this
way, UNDP works with local leaders and governments to provide opportunities for impoverished
people to create businesses and improve their economic condition.

The UNDP International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG)[2] in Brasilia, Brasil
expands the capacities of developing countries to design, implement and evaluate socially
inclusive development projects. IPC-IG is a global forum for South-South policy dialogue and
learning, having worked with more than 7,000 officials from more than 50 countries.

Crisis prevention and recovery UNDP works to reduce the risk of armed conflicts or disasters,
and promote early recovery after crises have occurred. UNDP works through its country offices
to support local government in needs assessment, capacity development, coordinated planning,
and policy and standard setting.

Examples of UNDP risk reduction programs include efforts to control small arms proliferation,
strategies to reduce the impact of natural disasters, and programs to encourage use of diplomacy
and prevent violence.

Recovery programs include disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants,

demining efforts, programs to reintegrate displaced persons, restoration of basic services, and
transitional justice systems for countries recovering from warfare.

Environment and Energy As the poor are disproportionately affected by environmental

degradation and lack of access to clean, affordable water, sanitation and energy services, UNDP
seeks to address environmental issues in order to improve developing countries’ abilities to
develop sustainably, increase human development and reduce poverty. UNDP works with
countries to strengthen their capacity to address global environmental issues by providing
innovative policy advice and linking partners through environmentally sensitive development
projects that help poor people build sustainable livelihoods.

UNDP’s environmental strategy focuses on effective water governance including access to water
supply and sanitation, access to sustainable energy services, Sustainable land management to
combat desertification and land degradation, conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity,
and policies to control emissions of harmful pollutants and ozone-depleting substances.

HIV/AIDS HIV/AIDS is a big issue in today's society and UNDP works to help countries
prevent further spreading and reduce its impact.

[edit] Human Development Report

Since 1990, the UNDP has annually published the Human Development Report, based on the
Human Development Index.

[edit] UN co-ordination role

UNDP plays a significant co-ordination role for the UN’s activities in the field of development.
This is mainly executed through its leadership of the UN Development Group and through the
Resident Co-ordinator System.

[edit] Disarmament and controversy

In mid-2006, as first reported by Inner City Press and then by The New Vision, UNDP halted its
disarmament programs in the Karamoja region of Uganda in response to human rights abuses in
the parallel forcible disarmament programs carried out by the Uganda People's Defense Force.

[edit] United Nations Development Group

Main article: United Nations Development Group

The United Nations Development Group (UNDG) was created by the Secretary General in 1997,
to improve the effectiveness of UN development at the country level. The UNDG brings together
the operational agencies working on development. The Group is chaired by the Administrator of
UNDP. UNDP also provides the Secretariat to the Group.

The UNDG develops policies and procedures that allow member agencies to work together and
analyze country issues, plan support strategies, implement support programmes, monitor results
and advocate for change. These initiatives increase UN impact in helping countries achieve the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), including poverty reduction.

Over 25 UN agencies are members of the UNDG. The Executive Committee consists of the four
"founding members": UNICEF, UNFPA, WFP and UNDP. The Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights is an ex-officio member of the Executive Committee.
[edit] Resident Coordinator System

The Resident Coordinator system co-ordinates all organizations of the United Nations system
dealing with operational activities for development in the field. The RC system aims to bring
together the different UN agencies to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of operational
activities at the country level. Resident Coordinators, who are funded, appointed and managed by
UNDP, lead UN country teams in more than 130 countries and are the designated representatives
of the Secretary-General for development operations. Working closely with national
governments, Resident Coordinators and country teams advocate the interests and mandates of
the UN drawing on the support and guidance of the entire UN family.

[edit] Criticism

The UNDP has been criticised by members of its staff and the Bush administration of the United
States for irregularities in its finances in North Korea. Artjon Shkurtaj claimed that he had found
forged US dollars in the Programmes safe while the staff were paid in Euros. The UNDP denied
any wrongdoing, and keeping improper accounts.[3]

[edit] Administrator

The UNDP Administrator has the rank of an Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations.
While the Administrator is often referred to as the third highest-ranking official in the UN (after
the UN Secretary General and the UN Deputy Secretary General), this has never been formally
codified.

In addition to his or her responsibilities as head of UNDP, the Administrator is also the Chair of
the UN Development Group.

[edit] Administrator

The position of Administrator is appointed by the Secretary-General of the UN and confirmed by

the General Assembly for a term of four years.[4]

Helen Clark, former Prime Minister of New Zealand, is the current Administrator. She was
appointed in late March 2009, succeeding Kemal Derviş.[5] The current government of New
Zealand strongly supported her nomination, along with Australia, the Pacific Island nations and
Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Gordon Brown.[6] The five countries on the UNDP board
also have some influence over selection. Current board members are Iran (chair), Haiti, Serbia,
the Netherlands and Tanzania.

[edit] Associate Administrator

During meetings of the UN Development Group, which are chaired by the Administrator, UNDP
is represented by the Associate Administrator. The position is currently held by Rebeca
Grynspan, appointed on 1 February 2010.
[edit] Assistant Administrators

Assistant Administrators of the UNDP, Assistant United Nations Secretary Generals and
Directors of the Regional Bureaus are Tegegnework Gettu (Ethiopia) for Africa, Amat Al Alim
Alsoswa (Yemen) for Arab States, Ajay Chhibber (India) for Asia & Pacific, Kori Udovički
(Serbia) for Europe & CIS and Rebeca Grynspan (Costa Rica) for Latin America and the
Caribbean.[7]

[edit] Previous Administrators

The first administrator of the UNDP was Paul G. Hoffman, former head of the Economic
Cooperation Administration which administered the Marshall Plan.

Other holders of the position have included: Bradford Morse, former Republican congressman
from Massachusetts; William Draper, venture capitalist and friend of George H.W. Bush who
saw one of the UN system's major achievements, the Human Development Report, introduced
during his tenure; Mark Malloch Brown, who was previously Vice President of External Affairs
at the World Bank and subsequently became UN Deputy Secretary General.

Kemal Derviş, a former finance minister of Turkey and senior World Bank official, was the
previous UNDP Administrator. Derviş started his four-year term on 15 August 2005.

[edit] Goodwill Ambassadors

UNDP, along with other UN agencies, has long enlisted the voluntary services and support of
prominent individuals as Goodwill Ambassadors or Youth Emissaries to highlight and promote
key policies. According to UNDP’s website: “Their fame helps amplify the urgent and universal
message of human development and international cooperation, helping to accelerate achievement
of the Millennium Development Goals.” Goodwill Embassy [3] has a complete list of UNDP
Goodwill Ambassadors as well as Goodwill Ambassadors of other UN Organisations.

[edit] Global Ambassadors

 Antonio Banderas[8]
 Crown Prince Haakon Magnus of Norway[9]
 Nadine Gordimer
 Misako Konno
 Ronaldo
 Zinedine Zidane
 Jonny Gilchrist
 Maria Sharapova
 Aisam-ul-Haq Qureshi in November 2010

[edit] Regional Goodwill Ambassador

 Arta Dobroshi[10]
  Muna Wassef
 Hussein Fahmy
 Adel Emam
 Khaled Abol Naga
 Didier Drogba

[edit] Honorary Human Development Ambassador

 Princess Basma bint Talal of Jordan

[edit] Honorary Advisor on Sports and Development

 Syndiely Wade

[edit] Youth Emissaries

 Dikembe Mutombo
 Baaba Maal
 Maria de Lurdes Mutola

[edit] See also

 Development assistance
 Economic development
 ECOSOC
 International development
 List of UNDP country codes
 U.S. Committee for the United Nations Development Program
 United Nations Millennium Campaign
United Nations Economic and Social Council
The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations constitutes one of six
principal organs of the United Nations responsible for the coordination of economic, social, and
related work of 14 UN specialized agencies, its functional commissions and five regional
commissions. ECOSOC has 54 members and holds one substantive session each July for a
duration of four weeks. Since 1998, it also held a meeting each April with finance ministers
heading key committees of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The
ECOSOC serves as the central forum for discussing international economic and social issues,
and for formulating policy recommendations addressed to Member States and the United Nations
system.[2]

Contents
[hide]

 1 Chamber
 2 President
 3 Members
 4 Functional commissions
 5 Regional commissions
 6 Specialized agencies
 7 Other entities
 8 Consultative status
 9 Reform of the Economic and Social Council
 10 See also
 11 References
 12 External links

[edit] Chamber

The Economic and Social Council Chamber in the United Nations Conference Building, was a
gift from Sweden. It was conceived by the Swedish architect Sven Markelius, one of the 11
architects in the international team that designed the UN Headquarters. Swedish pine wood has
been used around the delegates area, and for the railings and doors.

A special feature of the room are the exposed pipes and ducts in the ceiling above the public
gallery. The architect believed that anything useful could be left uncovered. The "unfinished"
ceiling is commonly seen as a symbolic reminder that the economic and social work of the
United Nations never finishes; there will always be something more that can be done to improve
the living conditions of the world's people.[3]
[edit] President

The current president of ECOSOC is Ambassador Datuk Hamidon Ali of Malaysia. The
president is elected for an one-year term and chosen among the small or middle powers
represented on ECOSOC.[4]

[edit] Members

The Council has 54 member states which are elected by the United Nations General Assembly
for overlapping three-year terms. Seats on the Council are based on geographical representation
with fourteen allocated to African States, eleven to Asian States, six to Eastern European States,
ten to Latin American and Caribbean States, and thirteen to Western European and other States.

Eastern European Latin American & Western European &

African States (14) Asian States (11)
States (6) Caribbean States (10) Other States (13)

 Cameroon  Bangladesh
 Estonia (2011)  Argentina (2012)  Australia (2010)
(2010) (2012)

 Comoros  Moldova
 China (2010)  Bahamas (2012)  Belgium (2012)
(2012) (2010)

 Congo (2010)  India (2011)  Poland (2010)  Brazil (2010)  Canada (2012)

 Côte d'Ivoire  Russian

 Iraq (2012)  Chile (2012)  Finland (2010)
(2011) Federation (2010)

 Slovakia
 Egypt (2012)  Japan (2011)  Guatemala (2011)  France (2011)
(2012)

 Malaysia  Ukraine
 Ghana (2012)  Peru (2011)  Germany (2011)
(2010) (2012)

 Guinea-Bissau  Mongolia  Saint Kitts and

 Italy (2012)
(2011) (2012) Nevis (2011)

 Mauritius  Pakistan  Liechtenstein

 Saint Lucia (2010)
(2011) (2010) (2011)

 Morocco  Philippines
 Uruguay (2010)  Malta (2011)
(2011) (2012)

 Mozambique  Republic of
 Venezuela (2011)  Norway (2010)
(2010) Korea (2010)

 Namibia  Saudi Arabia  Turkey (2011)

(2011) (2011)

 United Kingdom
 Niger (2010)
(2010)

 Rwanda  United States of

(2012) America (2012)

 Zambia (2012)

[edit] Functional commissions

 UN Commission for Social Development

 UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR): Disbanded 2006, replaced by the United Nations
Human Rights Council (UNHRC), a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly.
 Commission on Narcotic Drugs
 Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice
 Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD)
 Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD)
 UN Commission on the Status of Women (UN CSW)
 Commission on Population and Development
 UN Statistical Commission
 United Nations Forum on Forests

[edit] Regional commissions

 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE)

 United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA)
 United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
 United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)
 United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA)

[edit] Specialized agencies

The Specialized Agencies are autonomous organizations working with the United Nations and
each other, inter alia through the coordinating machinery of the Economic and Social Council.

 International Labour Organization (ILO)

 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
 World Health Organization (WHO)
 World Bank Group
o International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)
o International Development Association (IDA)
o International Finance Corporation (IFC)
o Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA)
 o International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
 International Monetary Fund (IMF)
 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
 International Maritime Organization (IMO)
 International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
 Universal Postal Union (UPU)
 World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
 International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
 United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)
 United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)
 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
 United Nations Office of Project Services (UNOPS)
 International Refugee Organization (IRO – ceased to exist in 1952)
 International Narcotics Control Board (INCB)

[edit] Other entities

 United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII)

 Sessional and Standing Committees Expert, ad hoc and related bodies
 United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF)

[edit] Consultative status

 See Consultative Status. See also Union of International Associations

[edit] Reform of the Economic and Social Council

This section does not cite any references or sources.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (November 2010)

For historical reasons, the governance of the multilateral system is complex and fragmented.
This has limited the capacity of ECOSOC to influence international policies in trade, finance and
investment. Reform proposals aim to enhance the relevance and contribution of the Council. A
major reform was approved by the 2005 World Summit on the basis of proposals submitted by
the Secretary-General Kofi Annan. The Summit aimed to establish ECOSOC as a quality
platform for high-level engagement among member states and with the international financial
institutions, the private sector and civil society on emerging global trends, policies and action.
Specifically, it was decided to hold biennial high-level Development Cooperation Forums at the
level of national leaders by transforming the high-level segment of the Council to review trends
in international development cooperation and to promote greater coherence among development
activities. Furthermore, the Summit decided to hold annual ministerial-level substantive reviews
to assess progress in achieving internationally agreed development goals, particularly the
Millennium Development Goals. Subsequent proposals by the High-level panel Report on
System-Wide Coherence in November 2006 aimed to establish a forum within ECOSOC as a
counter-model to the exclusive club of the G8 and G20. The Forum was to comprise 27 heads of
state (L27), corresponding to half of the ECOSOC membership, to meet annually to provide
international leadership in the development area. The proposal was not approved by the General
Assembly.

[edit] See also

 Copenhagen Consensus
 French Economic and Social Council; Economic and Social Committee of the European Union
 International Court of Justice
 International Hydrological Programme
 UN General Assembly
 UN Secretariat
 UN Security Council
 UN Trusteeship Council
 UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs
 United Nations Interpretation Service
 United Nations System

United Nations General Assembly

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA/GA) is one of the five principal organs of the
United Nations and the only one in which all member nations have equal representation. Its
powers are to oversee the budget of the United Nations, appoint the non-permanent members to
the Security Council, receive reports from other parts of the United Nations and make
recommendations in the form of General Assembly Resolutions.[1] It has also established a wide
number of subsidiary organs.[2]

The General Assembly meets under its president or secretary general in regular yearly sessions
the main part of which lasts from September to December and resumed part from January until
all issues are addressed (which often is just before the next session's start). It can also reconvene
for special and emergency special sessions. Its composition, functions, powers, voting, and
procedures are set out in Chapter IV of the United Nations Charter.

The first session was convened on 10 January 1946 in the Westminster Central Hall in London
and included representatives of 51 nations.

Voting in the General Assembly on important questions – recommendations on peace and

security; election of members to organs; admission, suspension, and expulsion of members;
budgetary matters – is by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting. Other questions are
decided by majority vote. Each member country has one vote. Apart from approval of budgetary
matters, including adoption of a scale of assessment, Assembly resolutions are not binding on the
members. The Assembly may make recommendations on any matters within the scope of the
UN, except matters of peace and security under Security Council consideration. The one state,
one vote power structure theoretically allows states comprising just eight percent of the world
population to pass a resolution by a two-thirds vote.

During the 1980s, the Assembly became a forum for the North-South dialogue – the discussion
of issues between industrialized nations and developing countries. These issues came to the fore
because of the phenomenal growth and changing makeup of the UN membership. In 1945, the
UN had 51 members. It now has 192, of which more than two-thirds are developing countries.
Because of their numbers, developing countries are often able to determine the agenda of the
Assembly (using coordinating groups like the G77), the character of its debates, and the nature of
its decisions. For many developing countries, the UN is the source of much of their diplomatic
influence and the principal outlet for their foreign relations initiatives.
Contents
[hide]

 1 Agenda
 2 Resolutions
 3 Elections
 4 Special sessions
 5 Emergency special sessions
 6 Subsidiary organs
o 6.1 Committees
 6.1.1 Main committees
 6.1.2 Other committees
o 6.2 Commissions
o 6.3 Boards
o 6.4 Councils and panels
o 6.5 Working Groups and other
 7 Seating in the General Assembly
 8 General Assembly reform and UNPA
 9 See also
 10 Notes
 11 External links

[edit] Agenda

The agenda for each session is planned up to seven months in advance and begins with the
release of a preliminary list of items to be included in the provisional agenda.[3] This is refined
into a provisional agenda 60 days before the opening of the session. After the session begins, the
final agenda is adopted in a plenary meeting which allocates the work to the various Main
Committees who later submit reports back to the Assembly for adoption by consensus or by vote.
Westminster Central Hall, the first meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in 1946

Items on the agenda are numbered. Regular plenary sessions of the General Assembly in recent
years have initially been scheduled to be held over the course of just three months, however
additional work loads have extended these sessions to last on through just short of the next
session. The routinely scheduled portions of the sessions are normally scheduled to commence
on "the Tuesday of the third week in September, counting from the first week that contains at
least one working day," as per the UN Rules of Procedure. The last two of these Regular sessions
were routinely scheduled to recess exactly three months afterwards in early December, but were
resumed in January and extended on until just before the beginning of the following sessions.

[edit] Resolutions
See also: United Nations General Assembly Resolution and United Nations Document Codes

The General Assembly votes on many resolutions brought forth by sponsoring states. These are
generally statements symbolizing the sense of the international community about an array of
world issues. Most General Assembly resolutions are not enforceable as a legal or practical
matter, because the General Assembly lacks enforcement powers with respect to most issues.
The General Assembly has authority to make final decisions in some areas such as the United
Nations budget.

From the First to the Thirtieth General Assembly sessions, all General Assembly resolutions
were numbered consecutively, with the resolution number followed by the session number in
Roman numbers (for example, Resolution 1514 (XV), which was the 1514th numbered
resolution adopted by the Assembly, and was adopted at the Fifteenth Regular Session (1960)).
Beginning with the Thirty-First Session, resolutions are numbered by individual session (for
example Resolution 41/10 represents the 10th resolution adopted at the Forty-First Session).

General Assembly Resolutions are generally non-binding on member states, but carry
considerable political weight, and are legally binding towards the operations of the General
Assembly. The General Assembly can also refer an issue to the Security Council to put in place a
binding resolution.

The General Assembly also approves the budget of the United Nations, and decides how much
money each member state must pay to run the organization.[4]

[edit] Elections

The General Assembly votes in elections for the ten non-permanent members of the United
Nations Security Council. These elections take place every two years, and member states serve
two year terms, with five replaced each year. The candidates are selected by their regional
groups. The General Assembly also elects members of the United Nations Economic and Social
Council. It also elects members of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, and
some members of the United Nations Trusteeship Council. The General Assembly appoints the
Secretary-General of the United Nations on recommendation of the Security Council, and adopts
rules governing the administration of the Secretariat. Along with the Security Council, elects
Judges for the International Court of Justice in The Hague.[5]

[edit] Special sessions

Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero addressing the General Assembly in New York, 20
September 2005

Special sessions may be convened at the request of the UN Security Council, or a majority of UN
members, or, if the majority concurs, of a single member. A special session was held on October
1995 at the head of government level to commemorate the UN's 50th anniversary. Another
special session was held in September 2000 to celebrate the millennium; it put forward the
Millennium Development Goals. A further special session (2005 World Summit) was held in
September 2005 to commemorate the UN's 60th anniversary; it assessed progress on the
Millennium Development Goals, and discussed Kofi Annan's In Larger Freedom proposals.

At the first Special Session of the UN General Assembly held in 1947, Osvaldo Aranha, then
president of the Special Session, began a tradition that has remained until today whereby the first
speaker at this major international forum is always a Brazilian.[6]

[edit] Emergency special sessions

The General Assembly may take action on maintaining international peace and security if the
UN Security Council is unable, usually due to disagreement among the permanent members, to
exercise its primary responsibility. If not in session at the time, the General Assembly may meet
in emergency special session[7] within 24 hours of the request. Such emergency special sessions
are to be called if requested by the UN Security Council on the vote of any seven members, or by
a majority of the Members of the United Nations.

The "Uniting for Peace" resolution, adopted 3 November 1950, empowered the Assembly to
convene in emergency special session in order to recommend collective measures – including the
use of armed force — in the event of a breach of the peace or act of aggression. As with all
Assembly resolutions, two-thirds of UN Members 'present and voting' must approve any such
recommendation before it can be formally adopted by the Assembly. Emergency special sessions
have been convened under this procedure on ten occasions. The two most recent, in 1982 and
1997 through 2003 respectively, have both been about the State of Israel.

[edit] Subsidiary organs

The United Nations General Assembly building.

The General Assembly subsidiary organs are divided into five categories: committees (30 total,
six main), commissions (seven), boards (six), councils and panels (five), working groups, and
"other".

[edit] Committees

[edit] Main committees

The main committees are ordinally numbered, 1–6:

 The First Committee: Disarmament and International Security (DISEC)

 The Second Committee: Economic and Financial (ECOFIN)
 The Third Committee: Social, Cultural, and Humanitarian (SOCHUM)
 The Fourth Committee: Special Political and Decolonization (SPECPOL)
 The Fifth Committee: Administrative and Budgetary
 The Sixth Committee: Legal.

The roles of many of the main committees have changed over time. Until the late 1970s, the First
Committee was the Political and Security Committee (POLISEC) and there was also a sufficient
number of additional "political" matters that an additional, unnumbered main committee, called
the Special Political Committee, also sat. The Fourth Committee formerly handled Trusteeship
and Decolonization matters. With the decreasing number of such matters to be addressed as the
trust territories attained independence and the decolonization movement progressed, the
functions of the Special Political Committee were merged into the Fourth Committee during the
1990s.

Each main committee consists of all the members of the General Assembly. Each elects a
chairman, three vice chairmen, and a rapporteur at the outset of each regular General Assembly
session.
[edit] Other committees

These are not numbered. According to the General Assembly website, the most important are:

 Credentials Committee – This committee is charged with ensuring that the diplomatic
credentials of all UN representatives are in order. The Credentials Committee consists of nine
Member States elected early in each regular General Assembly session.
 General Committee – This is a supervisory committee entrusted with ensuring that the whole
meeting of the Assembly goes smoothly. The General Committee consists of the president and
vice presidents of the current General Assembly session and the chairman of each of the six
Main Committees..

Other committees of the General Assembly are enumerated.

[edit] Commissions

There are seven commissions:

 Disarmament Commission, established by GA Resolution 502 (VI) and S-10/2

 International Civil Service Commission, established by GA Resolution 3357 (XXIX)
 International Law Commission, established by GA Resolution 174 (II)
 United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), established by GA
Resolution 2205 (XXI)
 United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, established by GA Resolution 194 (III)
 United Nations Peacebuilding Commission , established by GA Resolution 60/180 and UN
Security Council Resolutions 1645 (2005) and 1646 (2005)]

Despite its name, the former United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) was
actually a subsidiary body of ECOSOC.

[edit] Boards

There are six boards.[dead link]

[edit] Councils and panels

The most important (as well as the newest) council is the United Nations Human Rights Council,
which replaced the aforementioned UNCHR in March 2006.

There are a total of four councils and one panel.

[edit] Working Groups and other

There is a varied group of working groups and other subsidiary bodies.

[edit] Seating in the General Assembly

Countries are seated alphabetically in the General Assembly. However, the country which
occupies the front-most left position (and hence the countries' seating position in the Assembly)
is rotated annually by ballot. One country is balloted each year to sit in the front-most left
position, and the remaining countries fall into line, according to the English alphabet, behind it.[8]

[edit] General Assembly reform and UNPA

See also: United Nations Parliamentary Assembly

On 21 March 2005, Secretary-General Kofi Annan presented a report, In Larger Freedom, that
criticized the General Assembly for focusing so much on consensus that it was passing watered-
down resolutions reflecting "the lowest common denominator of widely different opinions". He
also criticized the Assembly for trying to address too broad an agenda, instead of focusing on
"the major substantive issues of the day, such as international migration and the long-debated
comprehensive convention on terrorism". Annan recommended streamlining the General
Assembly's agenda, committee structure, and procedures; strengthening the role and authority of
its president; enhancing the role of civil society; and establishing a mechanism to review the
decisions of its committees, in order to minimize unfunded mandates and micromanagement of
the UN Secretariat. Annan reminded UN members of their responsibility to implement reforms,
if they expect to realize improvements in UN effectiveness.[9]

The reform proposals were not taken up by the United Nations World Summit in September
2005. Instead, the Summit solely affirmed the central position of the General Assembly as the
chief deliberative, policymaking and representative organ of the United Nations, as well as the
role of the Assembly in the process of standard-setting and the codification of international law.
The Summit also called for strengthening the relationship between the General Assembly and the
other principal organs to ensure better coordination on topical issues that required coordinated
action by the United Nations, in accordance with their respective mandates.[citation needed]

A United Nations Parliamentary Assembly, or United Nations People's Assembly (UNPA), is a

proposed addition to the United Nations System that eventually could allow for direct election of
UN parliament members by citizens all over the world.

In the General Debate of the 65th General Assembly, Venezuela said "The United Nations has
exhausted its model. and it is not simply a matter of proceeding with reform, the twenty-first
century demands deep changes that are only possible with a rebuilding of this organization." The
pointed to the futility of resolutions concerning the Cuban embargo and the Middle East conflict
as reasons for the UN model having failed. Venezuela also called for the suspension of veto
rights because as a "remnant of the Second World War [it] is incompatible with the principle of
sovereign equality of States."[10]

[edit] See also

United Nations portal
 President of the United Nations General Assembly
 List of Permanent Representatives to the United Nations
 UN Parliamentary Assembly
 United Nations Headquarters
 United Nations Interpretation Service
 United Nations System
 Reform of the United Nations
 Music for UNICEF Concert
BASIC countries
The BASIC countries (also Basic countries, BASIC or G4) are a bloc of four large developing
countries – Brazil, South Africa, India and China – formed by an agreement on 28 November
2009. The four committed to act jointly at the Copenhagen climate summit, including a possible
united walk-out if their common minimum position was not met by the developed nations.[1]

This emerging geopolitical alliance, initiated and led by China, then brokered the final
Copenhagen Accord with the United States. Subsequently, the grouping is working to define a
common position on emission reductions and climate aid money, and to try to convince other
countries to sign up to the Copenhagen Accord.[2] However, in January 2010, the grouping
described the Accord as merely a political agreement and not legally binding, as is argued by the
US and Europe.

The four countries also said they will announce their plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 31
January 2010 as agreed in Copenhagen. Furthermore the grouping discussed the possibility of
providing financial and technical aid to the poorer nations of the G77, and promised details after
their Cape Town meeting in April 2010. This move was apparently intended to shame richer
nations into increasing their funding for climate mitigation in poorer nations.[3]

At the April 2010 meeting in Cape Town, environment ministers from the four countries called
for a legally-binding global agreement on long-term cooperative action under the UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its Kyoto Protocol, to be concluded at the next
UN Climate Change Conference in Cancun, Mexico in November 2010, or at the latest in South
Africa by 2011, saying that slow legislative progress in the United States should not be allowed
to dictate the pace of global agreement. The group's post-meeting statement also demanded that
developed countries allow developing countries "equitable space for development" as well as
providing them with finance, technology and capacity-building support, based on their "historical
responsibility for climate change".[4]

Technical cooperation among the countries appears to be following, as in May 2010 South
Africa, Brazil and India announced a joint programme to develop satellites.[5]

[edit] See also

 BRIC + South Africa = "BRICS"

 Potential superpower
 Emerging markets
 ABC nations
 Next Eleven
 G8
 G20
 Politics of global warming
BRIC
In economics, BRIC (typically rendered as "the BRICs" or "the BRIC countries" or known as
the "Big Four") is a grouping acronym that refers to the countries of Brazil, Russia, India, and
China that are deemed to all be at a similar stage of newly advanced economic development.
Despite lagging behind the other members in terms of economic growth, China formally invited
South Africa to join the BRICs in 2010, and so the acronym changes from "the BRICs" to "the
BRICS".[1] South Africa thus became the first African country to be admitted to BRICS.

The acronym was coined by Jim O'Neill in a 2001 paper entitled "The World Needs Better
Economic BRICs".[2][3][4] The acronym has come into widespread use as a symbol of the shift in
global economic power away from the developed G7 economies toward the developing world.

According to a paper published in 2005, Mexico and South Korea are the only other countries
comparable to the BRICs, but their economies were excluded initially because they were
considered already more developed as they are already members of the OECD.[5] Goldman Sachs
argued that, since they are developing rapidly, by 2050 the combined economies of the BRICs
could eclipse the combined economies of the current richest countries of the world. The four
countries, combined, currently account for more than a quarter of the world's land area and more
than 40% of the world's population.[6][7]

Goldman Sachs did not argue that the BRICs would organize themselves into an economic bloc,
or a formal trading association, as the European Union has done.[8] However, there are some
indications that the "four BRIC countries have been seeking to form a 'political club' or
'alliance'", and thereby converting "their growing economic power into greater geopolitical
clout".[9][10] On June 16, 2009, the leaders of the BRIC countries held their first summit in
Yekaterinburg, and issued a declaration calling for the establishment of an equitable, democratic
and multipolar world order. Since then they have met in Brasília in 2010 and will meet in China
in 2011.[11]
Contents
[hide]

 1 The BRIC thesis

o 1.1 (2003) Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050
o 1.2 (2004) Follow-up report
o 1.3 (2007) Second Follow-up report
o 1.4 (2010) EM Equity in Two Decades: A Changing Landscape
 2 The BRIC numbers
o 2.1 Statistics
o 2.2 BRIC in future
 3 BRIC summits
 4 The BRIC term
o 4.1 Marketing
o 4.2 The BRIC and International Law
o 4.3 BRICs and financial diversification
o 4.4 Criticism
o 4.5 BRICS: South Africa's Inclusion
 5 Other additions
o 5.1 Mexico
o 5.2 South Korea & United Korea
 6 See also
 7 References
 8 Bibliography
 9 External links

[edit] The BRIC thesis

São Paulo, Brazil.

Moscow, Russia.

File:Prabhadevi Worli Skyline.jpg

Mumbai, India.

Shanghai, China.

Goldman Sachs argues that the economic potential of Brazil, Russia, India, and China is such
that they could become among the four most dominant economies by the year 2050. The thesis
was proposed by Jim O'Neill, global economist at Goldman Sachs.[12] These countries encompass
over 25% of the world's land coverage and 40% of the world's population and hold a combined
GDP (PPP) of 18.486 trillion dollars. On almost every scale, they would be the largest entity on
the global stage. These four countries are among the biggest and fastest growing emerging
markets.[citation needed]

However, it is not the intent of Goldman Sachs to argue that these four countries are a political
alliance (such as the European Union) or any formal trading association, like ASEAN.
Nevertheless, they have taken steps to increase their political cooperation, mainly as a way of
influencing the United States position on major trade accords, or, through the implicit threat of
political cooperation, as a way of extracting political concessions from the United States, such as
the proposed nuclear cooperation with India.[citation needed]
[edit] (2003) Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050

Here's what Goldman Sachs had to say in its original report[13] (defended in the paper Dreaming
with BRICs: The Path to 2050) "Dreaming with BRICS: The Path to 2050," published in 2003:

 China's economy will surpass Germany in the next few years, Japan by 2015, and the United
States by 2041.
 India's growth rate will be the highest—not China's -- and it will overtake Japan (today the
world's second-largest economy) by 2032.
 BRICs’ currencies could appreciate by 300% over the next 50 years, providing a big tailwind for
investors in BRIC assets.
 Taken together, the BRICs could be larger than the United States and the developed economies
of Europe within 40 years.
 By 2025, BRICs will bring another 200 million people with incomes above $15,000 into the
world's economy. That's equal to the combined populations of Germany, France and the United
Kingdom.

However, Goldman Sachs has now become more bullish on the BRICs since it published its
original report. The size of China's economy overtook Germany's economy in 2007, a year
earlier than expected, and has over taken Japan's in July 2010.[14] Goldman Sachs now believes
that the Chinese economy will overtake the United States by 2027. The latest prediction after
Global Financial Crisis occur, November 2010: Standard Chartered Plc. says, China will
overtake the US to become the world's largest economy by 2020. And then China's economy will
be twice as large as the US by 2030 and account for 24 percent of global output, up from 9
percent in 2010.[15] And with India accounting for 10 of the 30 fastest-growing urban areas in the
world and 700 million people moving to cities by 2050, its influence on the world economy will
be bigger and quicker than was implied in 2003.

The BRIC thesis recognizes that Brazil, Russia, India and China[16] have changed their political
systems to embrace global capitalism. Goldman Sachs predicts that China and India,
respectively, will become the dominant global suppliers of manufactured goods and services,
while Brazil and Russia will become similarly dominant as suppliers of raw materials. It should
be noted that of the four countries, Brazil remains the only nation that has the capacity to
continue all elements, meaning manufacturing, services, and resource supplying simultaneously.
Cooperation is thus hypothesized to be a logical next step among the BRICs because Brazil and
Russia together form the logical commodity suppliers to India and China. Thus, the BRICs have
the potential to form a powerful economic bloc to the exclusion of the modern-day states
currently of "Group of Eight" status. Brazil is dominant in soy and iron ore while Russia has
enormous supplies of oil and natural gas. Goldman Sachs' thesis thus documents how
commodities, work, technology, and companies have diffused outward from the United States
across the world.

Following the end of the Cold War or even before, the governments comprising BRIC all
initiated economic or political reforms to allow their countries to enter the world economy. In
order to compete, these countries have simultaneously stressed education, foreign investment,
domestic consumption, and domestic entrepreneurship.
[edit] (2004) Follow-up report

The Goldman Sachs global economics team released a follow-up report to its initial BRIC study
in 2004.[17] The report states that in BRIC nations, the number of people with an annual income
over a threshold of $3,000, will double in number within three years and reach 800 million
people within a decade. This predicts a massive rise in the size of the middle class in these
nations. In 2025, it is calculated that the number of people in BRIC nations earning over $15,000
may reach over 200 million. This indicates that a huge pickup in demand will not be restricted to
basic goods but impact higher-priced goods as well. According to the report, first China and then
a decade later India will begin to dominate the world economy.

Yet despite the balance of growth, swinging so decisively towards the BRIC economies, the
average wealth level of individuals in the more advanced economies will continue to far outstrip
the BRIC economic average. Goldman Sachs estimates that by 2025 the income per capita in the
six most populous EU countries will exceed $35,000, whereas only about 500 million people in
the BRIC economies will have similar income levels.

The report also highlights India's great inefficiency in energy use and mentions the dramatic
under-representation of these economies in the global capital markets. The report also
emphasizes the enormous populations that exist within the BRIC nations, which makes it
relatively easy for their aggregate wealth to eclipse the G6, while per-capita income levels
remain far below the norm of today's industrialized countries. This phenomenon, too, will affect
world markets as multinational corporations will attempt to take advantage of the enormous
potential markets in the BRICs by producing, for example, far cheaper automobiles and other
manufactured goods affordable to the consumers within the BRICs in lieu of the luxury models
that currently bring the most income to automobile manufacturers. India and China have already
started making their presence felt in the service and manufacturing sector respectively in the
global arena. Developed economies of the world have already taken serious note of this fact.

[edit] (2007) Second Follow-up report

This report compiled by lead authors Tushar Poddar and Eva Yi gives insight into "India's Rising
Growth Potential". It reveals updated projection figures attributed to the rising growth trends in
India over the last four years. Goldman Sachs assert that "India's influence on the world
economy will be bigger and quicker than implied in our previously published BRICs research".
They noted significant areas of research and development, and expansion that is happening in the
country, which will lead to the prosperity of the growing middle-class.[18]

"India has 10 of the 30 fastest-growing urban areas in the world and, based on current trends, we
estimate a massive 700 million people will move to cities by 2050. This will have significant
implications for demand for urban infrastructure, real estate, and services."[18]

In the revised 2007 figures, based on increased and sustaining growth, more inflows into foreign
direct investment, Goldman Sachs predicts that "from 2007 to 2020, India's GDP per capita in
US$ terms will quadruple", and that the Indian economy will surpass the United States (in US$)
by 2043.[18] It states that the four nations as a group will overtake the G7 in 2032.[18]
[edit] (2010) EM Equity in Two Decades: A Changing Landscape

According to a new report from Goldman Sachs, China might surpass the US in equity market
capitalization terms by 2030 and become the single largest equity market in the world. By 2020,
US GDP might be only slightly larger than China's GDP. Together, the four BRICs may account
for 41% of the world's market capitalization by 2030, the report said.[19]

[edit] The BRIC numbers

The Economist publishes an annual table of social and economic national statistics in its Pocket
World in Figures.[citation needed] Extrapolating the global rankings from their 2008 Edition for the
BRIC countries and economies in relation to various categories provides an interesting
touchstone in relation to the economic underpinnings of the BRIC thesis. It also illustrates how,
despite their divergent economic bases, the economic indicators are remarkably similar in global
rankings between the different economies. It also suggests that, while economic arguments can
be made for linking Mexico into the BRIC thesis, the case for including South Korea looks
considerably weaker. A Goldman Sachs paper published later in December 2005 explained why
Mexico was not included in the original BRICs.[5]

[edit] Statistics
Painting BRIC by numbers

Categories  Brazil  Russia  India  China

Area 5th 1st 7th 3rd

Population 5th 9th 2nd 1st

Population growth rate 107th 221st 90th 156th

Labour force 5th 7th 2nd 1st

GDP (nominal) 8th 12th 11th 2nd

GDP (PPP) 9th 7th 4th 2nd

GDP (nominal) per capita 60th 59th 139th 98th

GDP (PPP) per capita 75th 51st 128th 97th

GDP (real) growth rate 113st 206th 6th 3rd

Human Development Index 75th 71st 134th 92nd

Exports 23rd 12th 18th 1st

Imports 24th 14th 15th 2nd

Current account balance 47th 5th 169th 1st

 Received FDI 11th 12th 29th 5th

Foreign exchange reserves 7th 3rd 5th 1st

External debt 28th 24th 26th 23rd

Public debt 47th 122nd 29th 98th

Electricity consumption 9th 4th 5th 2nd

Number of mobile phones 5th 4th 2nd 1st

Number of internet users 5th 8th 4th 1st

Motor vehicle production 6th 19th 7th 1st

Military expenditures 12th 5th 10th 2nd

Active troops 14th 5th 3rd 1st

Rail network 10th 2nd 4th 3rd

Road network 4th 8th 3rd 2nd

[edit] BRIC in future

The list of 22 selected countries by nominal GDP from year 2006 to 2050: BRICs, G7 and Next
Eleven. The bottom chart list the same 22 countries by nominal GDP per capita (the rankings for
this bottom chart do not reflect the GDP per capita for all the world's countries). BRIC countries
are highlighted and labeled in bold. Rank 2006: Number 1 to 15 are G20 countries. Five other
countries of G20 not in the list are: Argentina, Australia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and
European Union. Number 1 to 8 are G7 (top 7) countries, except China. Since 2027 China will
surpass USA. Rank 2050: Top5 countries are: 1.China, 2.USA, 3.India, 4.Brazil, 5.Mexico (All 3
BRIC countries plus USA and Mexico). G7 countries at 2006 which not include in Top5 2050
countries are: Japan (8), Germany (10), United Kingdom (9), France (12), Italy (18) and Canada
(16). So only USA from G7 2006 will be one of the Top 5 countries in 2050. Figures reflect data
published in 2007.
The ten largest economies in the world in 2050, measured in GDP nominal (millions of USD), according
to Goldman Sachs.[20]

Gross Domestic Product [2050-2006] (in US2006$ billions) [20]

Rank
Country 2050 2045 2040 2035 2030 2025 2020 2015 2010 2006
2050

1  China 70,710 57,310 45,022 34,348 25,610 18,437 12,630 8,133 4,667 2,682

 United
2 38,514 33,904 29,823 26,097 22,817 20,087 17,978 16,194 14,535 13,245
States

3  India 37,668 25,278 16,510 10,514 6,683 4,316 2,848 1,900 1,256 909

4  Brazil 11,366 8,740 6,631 4,963 3,720 2,831 2,194 1,720 1,346 1,064

5  Mexico 9,340 7,204 5,471 4,102 3,068 2,303 1,742 1,327 1,009 851
6  Russia 8,580 7,420 6,320 5,265 4,265 3,341 2,554 1,900 1,371 982

7  Indonesia 7,010 4,846 3,286 2,192 1,479 1,033 752 562 419 350

8  Japan 6,677 6,300 6,042 5,886 5,814 5,570 5,224 4,861 4,604 4,336

 United
9 5,133 4,744 4,344 3,937 3,595 3,333 3,101 2,835 2,546 2,310
Kingdom

10  Germany 5,024 4,714 4,388 4,048 3,761 3,631 3,519 3,326 3,083 2,851

11  Nigeria 4,640 2,870 1,765 1,083 680 445 306 218 158 121

12  France 4,592 4,227 3,892 3,567 3,306 3,055 2,815 2,577 2,366 2,194

13  South Korea 4,083 3,562 3,089 2,644 2,241 1,861 1,508 1,305 1,071 887

14  Turkey 3,943 3,033 2,300 1,716 1,279 965 740 572 440 390

15  Vietnam 3,607 2,569 1,768 1,169 745 458 273 157 88 55

16  Canada 3,149 2,849 2,569 2,302 2,061 1,856 1,700 1,549 1,389 1,260

17  Philippines 3,010 2,040 1,353 882 582 400 289 215 162 117

18  Italy 2,950 2,737 2,559 2,444 2,391 2,326 2,444 2,072 1,914 1,809

19  Iran 2,663 2,133 1,673 1,273 953 716 544 415 312 245

20  Egypt 2,602 1,728 1,124 718 467 318 229 171 129 101

21  Pakistan 2,085 1,472 1,026 709 497 359 268 206 161 129

22  Bangladesh 1,466 1,001 676 451 304 210 150 110 81 63

For the table below: Rank 2006: Number 1 to 7 are G7 countries. Rank 2050: Only 4 of the G7
countries will be in the top 7 in 2050. All of G7 approximately double their GDP per Capita as at
2050 compare to 2006. But the highest growth is made by Vietnam which will make their GDP
per Capita 51.10x (2006 to 2050). The second and third best growth are made by BRIC
countries: India (25.5x) and China (24.32x). The other 2 BRIC countries also make significantly
growth: Russia (11.37x) and Brazil (8.79x).

Gross Domestic Product per capita (nominal) [2050-2006][20]

Rank Country 2050 2045 2040 2035 2030 2025 2020 2015 2010 2006 Percent
2050 growth
 2050/2006

 United
1 91,683 83,489 76,044 69,019 62,717 57,446 53,502 50,200 47,014 44,379 206%
States

 South
2 90,294 75,979 63,924 53,449 44,602 36,813 29,868 26,012 21,602 18,161 497%
Korea

 United
3 79,234 73,807 67,391 61,049 55,904 52,220 49,173 45,591 41,543 38,108 207%
Kingdom

4  Russia 78,435 65,708 54,221 43,800 34,368 26,061 19,311 13,971 9,833 6,909 1,137%

5  Canada 76,002 69,531 63,464 57,728 52,663 48,621 45,961 43,449 40,541 38,071 199%

6  France 75,253 68,252 62,136 56,562 52,327 48,429 44,811 41,332 38,380 36,045 208%

 German
7 68,253 62,658 57,118 51,710 47,263 45,033 43,223 40,589 37,474 34,588 197%
y

8  Japan 66,846 60,492 55,756 52,345 49,975 46,419 42,385 38,650 36,194 34,021 196%

9  Mexico 63,149 49,393 38,255 29,417 22,694 17,685 13,979 11,176 8,972 7,918 797%

10  Italy 58,545 52,760 48,070 44,948 43,195 41,358 38,990 35,908 32,948 31,123 188%

11  Brazil 49,759 38,149 29,026 21,924 16,694 12,996 10,375 8,427 6,882 5,657 879%

12  China 49,650 39,719 30,951 23,511 17,522 12,688 8,829 5,837 3,463 2,041 2,432%

13  Turkey 45,595 34,971 26,602 20,046 15,188 11,743 9,291 7,460 6,005 5,545 822%

 Vietna
14 33,472 23,932 16,623 11,148 7,245 4,583 2,834 1,707 1,001 655 5,110%
m

15  Iran 32,676 26,231 20,746 15,979 12,139 9,328 7,345 5,888 4,652 3,768 867%

 Indones
16 22,395 15,642 10,784 7,365 5,123 3,711 2,813 2,197 1,724 1,508 1,485%
ia

17  India 20,836 14,446 9,802 6,524 4,360 2,979 2,091 1,492 1,061 817 2,550%

18  Egypt 20,500 14,025 9,443 6,287 4,287 3,080 2,352 1,880 1,531 1,281 1,600%

19  Philippi 20,388 14,260 9,815 6,678 4,635 3,372 2,591 2,075 1,688 1,312 1,553%
 nes

20  Nigeria 13,014 8,934 6,117 4,191 2,944 2,161 1,665 1,332 1,087 919 1,416%

 Pakista
21 7,066 5,183 3,775 2,744 2,035 1,568 1,260 1,050 897 778 908%
n

 Banglad
22 5,235 3,767 2,698 1,917 1,384 1,027 790 627 510 427 1,225%
esh

[edit] BRIC summits

Leaders at the 1st BRIC summit. From left are: President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil; President
Dmitry Medvedev of Russia; President Hu Jintao of China, and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India.

The BRIC countries met for their first official summit on 16 June 2009, in Yekaterinburg,
Russia,[21] with Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Dmitry Medvedev, Manmohan Singh, and Hu Jintao,
the respective leaders of Brazil, Russia, India and China, all attending.[22] The core focus of the
summit was related to improving the current global economic situation and discussing how the
four countries can better work together in the future, as well as a more general push to reform
financial institutions.[21][22] There was also discussion surrounding how developing nations, such
as those members of BRIC, could be better involved in global affairs in the future.[22] In the
aftermath of the summit the BRIC nations suggested that there was a need for a new global
reserve currency that is 'diversified, stable and predictable'.[23] The statement that was released
stopped short of making a direct attack on the perceived 'dominance' of the US dollar, something
which the Russians have been critical of; however, it still led to a fall in the value of the dollar
against other major currencies.[24]
The foreign ministers of the BRIC countries had met previously on May 16, 2008 also in
Yekaterinburg.[10]

One week prior to the summit, Brazil offered $10 billion to the International Monetary Fund.[25]
It was the first time that the country had ever made such a loan.[25] Brazil had previously received
loans from the IMF and this announcement was treated as a significant demonstration of how
Brazil's economic position had changed.[25] China also announced plans to invest a total of $50.1
billion and Russia planned to invest $10 billion.[25]

South Africa will attend the summit in 2011 in Beijing, which may be renamed as BRICS, after
receiving a formal invitation from China in 2010.[10]

Summit Date Host country Host leader Location held

1st June 16, 2009  Russia Dmitry Medvedev Yekaterinburg

2nd April 16, 2010  Brazil Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva Brasília

3rd Q1 2011[26]  China Hu Jintao Beijing

[edit] The BRIC term

The BRIC leaders in 2009

The BRIC leaders in 2010

Various sources (see external links below) refer to a purported "original" BRIC agreement that
predates the Goldman Sachs thesis. Some of these sources claim that President Vladimir Putin of
Russia was the driving force behind this original cooperative coalition of developing BRIC
countries. However, thus far, no text has been made public of any formal agreement to which all
four BRIC states are signatories. This does not mean, however, that they have not reached a
multitude of bilateral or even quadrilateral agreements. Evidence of agreements of this type are
abundant and are available on the foreign ministry websites of each of the four countries.
Trilateral agreements and frameworks made among the BRICs include the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization (member states include Russia and China, associate members include India) and
the IBSA Trilateral Forum, which unites Brazil, India, and South Africa in annual dialogues.
Also important to note is the G-20 coalition of developing states which includes all the BRICs.

Also, because of the popularity of the Goldman Sachs thesis "BRIC", this term has sometimes
been extended whereby "BRICK"[27][28] (K for South Korea), "BRIMC"[29][30] (M for Mexico),
"BRICA" (GCC Arab countries – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman and the United
Arab Emirates)[31] and "BRICET" (including Eastern Europe and Turkey)[32] have become more
generic marketing terms to refer to these emerging markets.

In an August 2010 op-ed, Jim O'Neill of Goldman Sachs argued that Africa could be considered
the next BRIC.[33] Analysts from rival banks have sought to move beyond the BRIC concept, by
introducing their own groupings of emerging markets. Proposals include CIVETs (Colombia,
Indonesia, Vietnam, Egypt, Turkey and South Africa), the EAGLES (Emerging and Growth-
Leading Economies) and the 7 per cent Club (which includes those countries which have
averaged economic growth of at least 7 per cent a year).[34]

[edit] Marketing

The São Paulo's Stock Exchange is the 12th largest in the world by market capitalization

The BRIC term is also used by companies who refer to the four named countries as key to their
emerging markets strategies. By comparison the reduced acronym IC would not be attractive,
although the term "Chindia" is often used. The BRIC's study specifically focuses on large
countries, not necessarily the wealthiest or the most productive and was never intended to be an
investment thesis. If investors read the Goldman's research carefully, and agreed with the
conclusions, then they would gain exposure to Asian debt and equity markets rather than to Latin
America. According to estimates provided by the USDA, the wealthiest regions outside of the
G6 in 2015 will be Hong Kong, South Korea and Singapore. Combined with China and India,
these five economies are likely to be the world's five most influential economies outside of the
G6.

On the other hand, when the "R" in BRIC is extended beyond Russia and is used as a loose term
to include all of Eastern Europe as well, then the BRIC story becomes more compelling. At issue
are the multiple serious problems which confront Russia (potentially unstable government,
environmental degradation, critical lack of modern infrastructure, etc.[citation needed]), and the
comparatively much lower growth rate seen in Brazil. However, Brazil's lower growth rate
obscures the fact that the country is wealthier than China or India on a per-capita basis, has a
more developed and global integrated financial system and has an economy potentially more
diverse than the other BRICs due to its raw material and manufacturing potential. Many other
Eastern European countries, such as Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania,
Bulgaria, and several others were able to continually sustain high economic growth rates and do
not experience some of the problems that Russia experiences or experience them to a lesser
extent. In terms of GDP per capita in 2008, Brazil ranked 64th, Russia 42nd, India 113th and
China 89th. By comparison South Korea ranked 24th and Singapore 3rd.

Brazil's stock market, the Bovespa, has gone from approximately 9,000 in September 2002 to
over 70,000 in May 2008. Government policies have favored investment (lowering interest
rates), retiring foreign debt and expanding growth, and a reformulation of the tax system is being
voted in the congress. The British author and researcher Mark Kobayashi-Hillary wrote a book in
2007 titled 'Building a Future with BRICs' for European publisher Springer Verlag that examines
the growth of the BRICs region and its effect on global sourcing. Contributors to the book
include Nandan Nilekani, and Shiv Nadar.

[edit] The BRIC and International Law

Brazilian lawyer and author Adler Martins has published a paper called "Contratos
Internacionais entre os países do BRIC"[35] (International Agreements Among BRIC countries)
which highlights the international conventions ratified by the BRIC countries, which allow them
to maintain trade and investment activities safely within the group. Mr. Martin's study is being
further developed by the Federal University of the Minas Gerais State, in Brazil.

[edit] BRICs and financial diversification

It has been argued that geographic diversification would eventually generate superior risk-
adjusted returns for long-term global investors by reducing overall portfolio risk while capturing
some of the higher rates of return offered by the emerging markets of Asia, Eastern Europe and
Latin America.[36] By doing so, these institutional investors have contributed to the financial and
economic development of key emerging nations such as Brazil, India, China, and Russia. For
global investors, India and China constitute both large-scale production platforms and reservoirs
of new consumers, whereas Russia is viewed essentially as an exporter of oil and commodities-
Brazil and Latin America being somehow "in the middle".
[edit] Criticism

A criticism is that the BRIC projections are based on the assumptions that resources are limitless
and endlessly available when needed. In reality, many important resources currently necessary to
sustain economic growth, such as oil, natural gas, coal, other fossil fuels, and uranium might
soon experience a peak in production before enough renewable energy can be developed and
commercialized, which might result in slower economic growth than anticipated, thus throwing
off the projections and their dates. The economic emergence of the BRICs will have
unpredictable consequences for the global environment. Indeed, proponents of a set carrying
capacity for the Earth may argue that, given current technology, there is a finite limit to how
much the BRICs can develop before exceeding the ability of the global economy to supply.[37]

Academics and experts have suggested that China is in a league of its own compared to the other
BRIC countries.[38] As David Rothkopf wrote in Foreign Policy, "Without China, the BRICs are
just the BRI, a bland, soft cheese that is primarily known for the whine that goes with it. China is
the muscle of the group and the Chinese know it. They have effective veto power over any BRIC
initiatives because without them, who cares really? They are the one with the big reserves. They
are the biggest potential market. They are the U.S. partner in the G2 (imagine the coverage a G2
meeting gets vs. a G8 meeting) and the E2 (no climate deal without them) and so on."[39]
Deutsche Bank Research said in a report that "economically, financially and politically, China
overshadows and will continue to overshadow the other BRICs." It added that China's economy
is larger than that of the three other BRIC economies (Brazil, Russia and India) combined.
Moreover, China's exports and its official forex reserve holdings are more than twice as large as
those of the other BRICs combined.[40]

Another criticism is the understatement of GDP growth in China over the next 45 years; which
predicts growth falling far below normal development. This contradicts the rapid economic
growth that has already taken place in the country and the experience of countries like South
Korea catching up with western GDP per capita, which China has been growing faster than in a
similar period of development.[citation needed]

There are many uncertainties and assumptions in the BRIC thesis that could mean that any or all
of these four countries will not live up to their promise.[citation needed] The preeminence of China and
India as major manufacturing countries with unrealised potential has been widely recognised, but
some commentators state that China's and Russia's large-scale disregard for human rights and
democracy could be a problem in the future. Human rights issues do not inform the foreign
policies of these two countries to the same extent as they do the policies of other large states such
as Japan, India, the EU states and the USA. There is also the possibility of conflict over Taiwan
in the case of China and smaller democracies that lie in the vicinity of these two authoritarian
giants will no doubt be affected by human rights issues being relegated to a lower global priority.

There is also the issue of population growth. The population of Russia is beginning to shrink fast.
Brazil's and China's populations will begin to decline in several decades[citation needed], with their
demographic windows closing in several decades as well. This may have implications for those
countries' future, for there might be a decrease in the overall labor force and a negative change in
the proportion of workers to retirees.
Brazil's economic potential has been anticipated for decades, but it had until recently consistently
failed to achieve investor expectations.[citation needed] Only in recent years has the country established
a framework of political, economic, and social policies that allowed it to resume consistent
growth. The result has been solid and paced economic development that rival its early 70's
"miracle years", as reflected in its expanding capital markets, lowest unemployment rates in
decades, and consistent international trade surpluses - that led to the accumulation of reserves
and liquidation of foreign debt (earning the country a coveted investment grade by the S&P and
Fitch Ratings in 2008).

Finally, India's relations with its neighbor Pakistan have always been tense. In 1998, there was a
nuclear standoff between Pakistan and India.[citation needed] Border conflicts with Pakistan, mostly
over the longheld dispute over Kashmir, has further aggravated any economic ties. The BRIC
countries have enormous populations of extremely impoverished people. This impedes progress
by limiting government finances, increasing social unrest, and limiting potential domestic
economic demand. Factors such as international conflict, civil unrest, unwise political policy,
outbreaks of disease and terrorism are all factors that are difficult to predict and that could have
an effect on the destiny of any country.

Other critics suggest that BRIC is nothing more than a neat acronym for the four largest
emerging market economies,[citation needed] but in economic and political terms nothing else (apart
from the fact that they are all big emerging markets) links the four. Two are manufacturing based
economies and big importers (China and India), but two are huge exporters of natural resources
(Brazil and Russia). The Economist, in its special report on Brazil, expressed the following view:
"In some ways Brazil is the steadiest of the BRICs. Unlike China and Russia it is a full-blooded
democracy; unlike India it has no serious disputes with its neighbors. It is the only BRIC without
a nuclear bomb." The Heritage Foundation's "Economic Freedom Index", which measures
factors such as protection of property rights and free trade ranks Brazil ("moderately free") above
the other BRICs ("mostly unfree").[41] Henry Kissinger has stated that the BRIC nations have no
hope of acting together as a coherent bloc in world affairs, and that any cooperation will be the
result of forces acting on the individual nations.[citation needed]

It is also noticed that BRIC countries have undermined qualitative factors that is reflected in
deterioration in Doing Business ranking 2010 and other several human indexes.[42]

In a not-so-subtle dig critical of the term as nothing more than a shorthand for emerging markets
generally, critics have suggested a correlating term, CEMENT (Countries in Emerging Markets
Excluded by New Terminology). Whilst they accept there has been spectacular growth of the
BRIC economies, these gains have largely been the result of the strength of emerging markets
generally, and that strength comes through having BRICs and CEMENT.[43]

[edit] BRICS: South Africa's Inclusion

Johannesburg sought BRIC membership over 2010 and the process for fromal admission began
as early as August 2010[44].South Africa was officially admitted as a BRIC nation on December
24th,2010 after being invited by China and the other BRIC countries to join the group[45]. The
capital “S” in BRICS stands for South Africa. President Jacob Zuma is expected to attend the
BRICS summit in Beijing in April 2011 as a full member. South Africa stands at a unique
position to influence African economic growth and investment. According to Jim O'neill of
Goldmansachs who originally coined the term, Africa's combined current gross domestic product
is reasonably similar to that of Brazil and Russia, and slightly above that of India[46]. South
Africa is a "gateway" to Southern Africa and Africa in general as the most developed African
country[47]. China is South Africa’s largest trading partner, and India wants to increase
commercial ties to Africa[48]. South Africa is also Africa’s largest economy, but as number 31 in
global GDP economies it is far behind its new partners[49].

Jim O'Neill expressed surprise when South Africa joined BRIC since South Africa's economy is
a quarter of the size of Russia's (the least economically powerful BRIC nation).[1]. He believed
that the potential was there but did not anticipate inclusion of South Africa at this stage[50].
Martyn Davies, a South African emerging markets expert, argued that the decision to invite
South Africa made little commercial sense but was poltically astute given China's attempts to
establish a foothold in Africa. Further, South Africa's inclusion in BRICS may translate to
greater South African support for China in global fora.[1]

African credentials are important geopolitically, giving BRICS a four-continent breadth,

influence and trade opportunities[51]. South Africa's addition is a deft political move that further
enhances BRICS’ power and status[52]. In the original essay that coined the term, Goldman Sachs
did not argue that the BRICs would organize themselves into an economic bloc, or a formal
trading association which this move signifies[53].

[edit] Other additions

Mexico and South Korea are currently the world's 13th and 15th largest by nominal GDP,[54] just
behind the BRIC and G7 economies, while both are experiencing rapid GDP growth of 5% every
year, a figure comparable to Brazil from the original BRICs. Jim O'Neill, expert from the same
bank and creator of the economic thesis, stated that in 2001 when the paper was created, it did
not consider Mexico, but today it has been included because the country is experiencing the same
factors that the other countries first included present.[29][30] While South Korea was not originally
included in the BRICs, recent solid economic growth led to Goldman Sachs proposing to add
Mexico and South Korea to the BRICs, changing the acronym to BRIMCK, with Jim O'Neill
pointing out that Korea "is better placed than most others to realize its potential due to its
growth-supportive fundamentals.[55]

A Goldman Sachs paper published later in December 2005 explained why Mexico and South
Korea weren't included in the original BRICs. According to the paper,[5] among the other
countries they looked at, only Mexico and South Korea have the potential to rival the BRICs, but
they are economies that they decided to exclude initially because they looked at them as already
more developed. However, due to the popularity of the Goldman Sachs thesis, "BRIMC" and
"BRICK" are becoming more generic marketing terms to refer to these six countries.

In their paper "BRICs and Beyond", Goldman Sachs stated that "Mexico, the four BRIC
countries and South Korea should not be really thought of as emerging markets in the classical
sense", adding that they are a "critical part of the modern globalised economy" and "just as
central to its functioning as the current G7".[56]

The term is primarily used in the economic and financial spheres as well as in academia. Its
usage has grown specially in the investment sector, where it is used to refer to the bonds emitted
by these emerging markets governments.[57][58][59]

[edit] Mexico

Mexico City, Mexico

Primarily, along with the BRICs,[60] Goldman Sachs argues that the economic potential of Brazil,
Russia, India, Mexico and China is such that they may become (with the USA) the six most
dominant economies by the year 2050. Due to Mexico's rapidly advancing infrastructure,
increasing middle class and rapidly declining poverty rates it is expected to have a higher GDP
per capita than all but three European countries by 2050, this new found local wealth also
contributes to the nation's economy by creating a large domestic consumer market which in turn
creates more jobs.

Mexico in 2050[61]

Mexico

GDP in USD $9.340 trillion

GDP per capita $63,149

GDP growth (2015–2050) 4.0%

Total population 142 million

[edit] South Korea & United Korea

Seoul, Korea

Busan, Korea

South Korea is by far the most highly developed country when compared to the BRICs and N-
11s, with a GDP per capita higher than Italy and Spain and HDI higher than Switzerland, France
and the United Kingdom. Yet, it has been achieving growth rates of 4-6%, a figure more than
double that of other advanced economies. More importantly, it has a significantly higher Growth
Environment Score (Goldman Sachs' way of measuring the long-term sustainability of growth)
than all of the BRICs or N-11s.[56] Commentators such as William Pesek Jr. from Bloomberg
argue that Korea is "Another 'BRIC' in Global Wall", suggesting that it stands out from the Next
Eleven economies. By GDP (PPP), South Korea already overtook a G7 and G8 economy,
Canada, in 2009. It then surpassed Spain in 2010 and at current speed, will take over Italy before
2018.[62] Economists from other investment firms argue that Korea will have a GDP per capita of
over $96,000 by 2050, surpassing the United States and by far the wealthiest among the G7,
BRIC and N-11 economies, suggesting that wealth is more important than size for bond
investors, stating that Korea's credit rating will be rated AAA sooner than 2050.[63]

Korea in 2050[64]

United Korea  South Korea  North Korea

GDP in USD $6.056 trillion $4.073 trillion $1.982 trillion

GDP per capita $86,000 $96,000 $70,000

GDP growth (2015–2050) 4.8% 3.9% 11.4%

Total population 71 million 42 million 28 million

In September 2009, Goldman Sachs published its 188th Global Economics Paper named "A
United Korea?" which highlighted in detail the potential economic power of a United Korea,
which will surpass all current G7 countries except the United States, such as Japan, the United
Kingdom, Germany and France within 30–40 years of reunification, estimating GDP to surpass
$6 trillion by 2050.[65] The young, skilled labor and large amount of natural resources from the
North combined with advanced technology, infrastructure and large amount of capital in the
South, as well as Korea's strategic location connecting three economic powers, is likely going to
create an economy larger than the bulk of the G7. According to some opinions, a reunited Korea
could occur before 2050,[65] or even between 2010 and 2020.[66] If it occurred, Korean
reunification would immediately raise the country's population to over 70 million.[67]

[edit] See also

 Potential superpower
 Emerging markets
 Next Eleven
 Asian Union
 North American Union
 CIVETS
 G8
 G20
 BASIC countries + Russia = BASICR
 PIGS (economics)
World Trade Organization
The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an organization that intends to supervise and
liberalize international trade. The organization officially commenced on January 1, 1995 under
the Marrakech Agreement, replacing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT),
which commenced in 1948. The organization deals with regulation of trade between participating
countries; it provides a framework for negotiating and formalizing trade agreements, and a
dispute resolution process aimed at enforcing participants' adherence to WTO agreements which
are signed by representatives of member governments and ratified by their parliaments.[4][5] Most
of the issues that the WTO focuses on derive from previous trade negotiations, especially from
the Uruguay Round (1986-1994).

The organization is currently endeavoring to persist with a trade negotiation called the Doha
Development Agenda (or Doha Round), which was launched in 2001 to enhance equitable
participation of poorer countries which represent a majority of the world's population. However,
the negotiation has been dogged by "disagreement between exporters of agricultural bulk
commodities and countries with large numbers of subsistence farmers on the precise terms of a
'special safeguard measure' to protect farmers from surges in imports. At this time, the future of
the Doha Round is uncertain."[6]

The WTO has 153 members,[7] representing more than 97% of total world trade[8] and 30
observers, most seeking membership. The WTO is governed by a ministerial conference,
meeting every two years; a general council, which implements the conference's policy decisions
and is responsible for day-to-day administration; and a director-general, who is appointed by the
ministerial conference. The WTO's headquarters is at the Centre William Rappard, Geneva,
Switzerland.
Contents
[hide]

 1 History
o 1.1 GATT rounds of negotiations
 1.1.1 From Genève to Tokyo
 1.1.2 Uruguay Round
o 1.2 Ministerial conferences
o 1.3 Doha Round
 2 Functions
 3 Principles of the trading system
 4 Organizational structure
o 4.1 Voting system
 5 Dispute settlement
 6 Accession and membership
o 6.1 Accession process
o 6.2 Members and observers
 7 Agreements
 8 Effectiveness
 9 Directors-General
 10 See also
 11 Notes
 12 References
 13 External links
o 13.1 Official WTO pages
o 13.2 Government pages on the WTO
o 13.3 Media pages on the WTO
o 13.4 Non-governmental organization pages on the WTO

[edit] History
See also: Timeline of the World Trade Organization

See also: International Trade Organization

Harry White (l) and John Maynard Keynes at the Bretton Woods Conference — Both economists had
been strong advocates of a liberal international trade environment, and recommended the
establishment of three institutions: the IMF (fiscal and monetary issues), the World Bank (financial and
structural issues), and the ITO (international economic cooperation). [9]

The WTO's predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), was established
after World War II in the wake of other new multilateral institutions dedicated to international
economic cooperation — notably the Bretton Woods institutions known as the World Bank and
the International Monetary Fund. A comparable international institution for trade, named the
International Trade Organization was successfully negotiated. The ITO was to be a United
Nations specialized agency and would address not only trade barriers but other issues indirectly
related to trade, including employment, investment, restrictive business practices, and
commodity agreements. But the ITO treaty was not approved by the U.S. and a few other
signatories and never went into effect.[10][11][12]

In the absence of an international organization for trade, the GATT would over the years
"transform itself" into a de facto international organization.[13]

[edit] GATT rounds of negotiations

See also: General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

The GATT was the only multilateral instrument governing international trade from 1945 until
the WTO was established in 1995.[14] Despite attempts in the mid 1950s and 1960s to create some
form of institutional mechanism for international trade, the GATT continued to operate for
almost half a century as a semi-institutionalized multilateral treaty regime on a provisional basis.
[15]
[edit] From Genève to Tokyo

Seven rounds of negotiations occurred under the GATT. The first real GATT trade rounds
concentrated on further reducing tariffs. Then, the Kennedy Round in the mid-sixties brought
about a GATT anti-dumping Agreement and a section on development. The Tokyo Round during
the seventies was the first major attempt to tackle trade barriers that do not take the form of
tariffs, and to improve the system, adopting a series of agreements on non-tariff barriers, which
in some cases interpreted existing GATT rules, and in others broke entirely new ground. Because
these plurilateral agreements were not accepted by the full GATT membership, they were often
informally called "codes". Several of these codes were amended in the Uruguay Round, and
turned into multilateral commitments accepted by all WTO members. Only four remained
plurilateral (those on government procurement, bovine meat, civil aircraft and dairy products),
but in 1997 WTO members agreed to terminate the bovine meat and dairy agreements, leaving
only two.[14]

[edit] Uruguay Round

During the Doha Round, the US government blamed Brazil and India for being inflexible, and the EU for
impeding agricultural imports.[16] The President of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, responded to the
criticisms by arguing that progress would only be achieved if the richest countries (especially the US and
countries in the EU) make deeper cuts in their agricultural subsidies, and further open their markets for
agricultural goods.[17]

Main article: Uruguay Round

Well before GATT's 40th anniversary, its members concluded that the GATT system was
straining to adapt to a new globalizing world economy.[18][19] In response to the problems
identified in the 1982 Ministerial Declaration (structural deficiencies, spill-over impacts of
certain countries' policies on world trade GATT could not manage etc.), the eighth GATT round
— known as the Uruguay Round — was launched in September 1986, in Punta del Este,
Uruguay.[18]

It was the biggest negotiating mandate on trade ever agreed: the talks were going to extend the
trading system into several new areas, notably trade in services and intellectual property, and to
reform trade in the sensitive sectors of agriculture and textiles; all the original GATT articles
were up for review.[19] The Final Act concluding the Uruguay Round and officially establishing
the WTO regime was signed during the April 1994 ministerial meeting at Marrakesh, Morocco,
and hence is known as the Marrakesh Agreement.[20]

The GATT still exists as the WTO's umbrella treaty for trade in goods, updated as a result of the
Uruguay Round negotiations (a distinction is made between GATT 1994, the updated parts of
GATT, and GATT 1947, the original agreement which is still the heart of GATT 1994).[18] GATT
1994 is not however the only legally binding agreement included via the Final Act at Marrakesh;
a long list of about 60 agreements, annexes, decisions and understandings was adopted. The
agreements fall into a structure with six main parts:

 The Agreement Establishing the WTO

 Goods and investment — the Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods including the GATT
1994 and the Trade Related Investment Measures
 Services — the General Agreement on Trade in Services
 Intellectual property — the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
(TRIPS)
 Dispute settlement (DSU)
 Reviews of governments' trade policies (TPRM) [21]

[edit] Ministerial conferences

The topmost decision-making body of the WTO is the Ministerial Conference, which usually
meets every two years. It brings together all members of the WTO, all of which are countries or
customs unions. The Ministerial Conference can take decisions on all matters under any of the
multilateral trade agreements. The inaugural ministerial conference was held in Singapore in
1996. Disagreements between largely developed and developing economies emerged during this
conference over four issues initiated by this conference, which led to them being collectively
referred to as the "Singapore issues". The second ministerial conference was held in Geneva in
Switzerland. The third conference in Seattle, Washington ended in failure, with massive
demonstrations and police and National Guard crowd control efforts drawing worldwide
attention. The fourth ministerial conference was held in Doha in the Persian Gulf nation of Qatar.
The Doha Development Round was launched at the conference. The conference also approved
the joining of China, which became the 143rd member to join. The fifth ministerial conference
was held in Cancún, Mexico, aiming at forging agreement on the Doha round. An alliance of 22
southern states, the G20 developing nations (led by India, China[22], Brazil, ASEAN led by the
Philippines), resisted demands from the North for agreements on the so-called "Singapore issues"
and called for an end to agricultural subsidies within the EU and the US. The talks broke down
without progress.

The sixth WTO ministerial conference was held in Hong Kong from 13-18 December 2005. It
was considered vital if the four-year-old Doha Development Agenda negotiations were to move
forward sufficiently to conclude the round in 2006. In this meeting, countries agreed to phase out
all their agricultural export subsidies by the end of 2013, and terminate any cotton export
subsidies by the end of 2006. Further concessions to developing countries included an agreement
to introduce duty free, tariff free access for goods from the Least Developed Countries, following
the Everything but Arms initiative of the European Union — but with up to 3% of tariff lines
exempted. Other major issues were left for further negotiation to be completed by the end of
2010. The WTO General Council, on 26 May 2009, agreed to hold a seventh WTO ministerial
conference session in Geneva from 30 November-3 December 2009. A statement by chairman
Amb. Mario Matus acknowledged that the prime purpose was to remedy a breach of protocol
requiring two-yearly "regular" meetings, which had lapsed with the Doha Round failure in 2005,
and that the "scaled-down" meeting would not be a negotiating session, but "emphasis will be on
transparency and open discussion rather than on small group processes and informal negotiating
structures". The general theme for discussion was "The WTO, the Multilateral Trading System
and the Current Global Economic Environment"[23]

[edit] Doha Round

Main article: Doha Round

The Doha Development Round started in 2001 and continues today.

The WTO launched the current round of negotiations, the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) or
Doha Round, at the fourth ministerial conference in Doha, Qatar in November 2001. The Doha
round was to be an ambitious effort to make globalization more inclusive and help the world's
poor, particularly by slashing barriers and subsidies in farming.[24] The initial agenda comprised
both further trade liberalization and new rule-making, underpinned by commitments to
strengthen substantial assistance to developing countries.[25]

The negotiations have been highly contentious and agreement has not been reached, despite the
intense negotiations at several ministerial conferences and at other sessions. Disagreements still
continue over several key areas including agriculture subsidies.[26]

[show]GATT and WTO trade rounds[27]v · d · e

[edit] Functions

Among the various functions of the WTO, these are regarded by analysts as the most important:

 It oversees the implementation, administration and operation of the covered agreements. [28][29]
 It provides a forum for negotiations and for settling disputes. [30][31]
Additionally, it is the WTO's duty to review and propagate the national trade policies, and to
ensure the coherence and transparency of trade policies through surveillance in global economic
policy-making.[29][31] Another priority of the WTO is the assistance of developing, least-
developed and low-income countries in transition to adjust to WTO rules and disciplines through
technical cooperation and training.[32]

The WTO is also a center of economic research and analysis: regular assessments of the global
trade picture in its annual publications and research reports on specific topics are produced by
the organization.[33] Finally, the WTO cooperates closely with the two other components of the
Bretton Woods system, the IMF and the World Bank.[30]

[edit] Principles of the trading system

The WTO establishes a framework for trade policies; it does not define or specify outcomes.
That is, it is concerned with setting the rules of the trade policy games.[34] Five principles are of
particular importance in understanding both the pre-1994 GATT and the WTO:

1. Non-Discrimination. It has two major components: the most favoured nation (MFN) rule, and
the national treatment policy. Both are embedded in the main WTO rules on goods, services,
and intellectual property, but their precise scope and nature differ across these areas. The MFN
rule requires that a WTO member must apply the same conditions on all trade with other WTO
members, i.e. a WTO member has to grant the most favorable conditions under which it allows
trade in a certain product type to all other WTO members. [34] "Grant someone a special favour
and you have to do the same for all other WTO members." [35] National treatment means that
imported goods should be treated no less favorably than domestically produced goods (at least
after the foreign goods have entered the market) and was introduced to tackle non-tariff
barriers to trade (e.g. technical standards, security standards et al. discriminating against
imported goods).[34]
2. Reciprocity. It reflects both a desire to limit the scope of free-riding that may arise because of
the MFN rule, and a desire to obtain better access to foreign markets. A related point is that for
a nation to negotiate, it is necessary that the gain from doing so be greater than the gain
available from unilateral liberalization; reciprocal concessions intend to ensure that such gains
will materialise.[36]
3. Binding and enforceable commitments. The tariff commitments made by WTO members in a
multilateral trade negotiation and on accession are enumerated in a schedule (list) of
concessions. These schedules establish "ceiling bindings": a country can change its bindings, but
only after negotiating with its trading partners, which could mean compensating them for loss of
trade. If satisfaction is not obtained, the complaining country may invoke the WTO dispute
settlement procedures.[35][36]
4. Transparency. The WTO members are required to publish their trade regulations, to maintain
institutions allowing for the review of administrative decisions affecting trade, to respond to
requests for information by other members, and to notify changes in trade policies to the WTO.
These internal transparency requirements are supplemented and facilitated by periodic country-
specific reports (trade policy reviews) through the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). [37]
The WTO system tries also to improve predictability and stability, discouraging the use of quotas
and other measures used to set limits on quantities of imports. [35]
 5. Safety valves. In specific circumstances, governments are able to restrict trade. There are three
types of provisions in this direction: articles allowing for the use of trade measures to attain
noneconomic objectives; articles aimed at ensuring "fair competition"; and provisions permitting
intervention in trade for economic reasons. [37] Exceptions to the MFN principle also allow for
preferential treatment of developing countries, regional free trade areas and customs unions.
[citation needed]

[edit] Organizational structure

The General Council has multiple bodies which oversee committees in different areas, re the
following:

Council for Trade in Goods

There are 11 committees under the jurisdiction of the Goods Council each with a specific task.
All members of the WTO participate in the committees. The Textiles Monitoring Body is separate
from the other committees but still under the jurisdiction of Goods Council. The body has its
own chairman and only 10 members. The body also has several groups relating to textiles. [38]

Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

Information on intellectual property in the WTO, news and official records of the activities of the
TRIPS Council, and details of the WTO’s work with other international organizations in the field.
[39]

Council for Trade in Services

The Council for Trade in Services operates under the guidance of the General Council and is
responsible for overseeing the functioning of the General Agreement on Trade in Services
(GATS). It is open to all WTO members, and can create subsidiary bodies as required. [40]

Trade Negotiations Committee

The Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) is the committee that deals with the current trade
talks round. The chair is WTO’s director-general. The committee is currently tasked with the
Doha Development Round.[41]

The Service Council has three subsidiary bodies: financial services, domestic regulations, GATS
rules and specific commitments.[38] The General council has several different committees,
working groups, and working parties.[42] There are committees on the following: Trade and
Environment; Trade and Development (Subcommittee on Least-Developed Countries); Regional
Trade Agreements; Balance of Payments Restrictions; and Budget, Finance and Administration.
There are working parties on the following: Accession. There are working groups on the
following: Trade, debt and finance; and Trade and technology transfer.
[edit] Voting system

The WTO operates on a one country, one vote system, but actual votes have never been taken.
Decision making is generally by consensus, and relative market size is the primary source of
bargaining power. The advantage of consensus decision-making is that it encourages efforts to
find the most widely acceptable decision. Main disadvantages include large time requirements
and many rounds of negotiation to develop a consensus decision, and the tendency for final
agreements to use ambiguous language on contentious points that makes future interpretation of
treaties difficult.[citation needed]

In reality, WTO negotiations proceed not by consensus of all members, but by a process of
informal negotiations between small groups of countries. Such negotiations are often called
"Green Room" negotiations (after the colour of the WTO Director-General's Office in Geneva),
or "Mini-Ministerials", when they occur in other countries. These processes have been regularly
criticised by many of the WTO's developing country members which are often totally excluded
from the negotiations..[citation needed]

Richard Harold Steinberg (2002) argues that although the WTO's consensus governance model
provides law-based initial bargaining, trading rounds close through power-based bargaining
favouring Europe and the U.S., and may not lead to Pareto improvement.[43]

[edit] Dispute settlement

Main article: Dispute settlement in the WTO

In 1994, the WTO members agreed on the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing
the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) annexed to the "Final Act" signed in Marrakesh in 1994.[44]
Dispute settlement is regarded by the WTO as the central pillar of the multilateral trading
system, and as a "unique contribution to the stability of the global economy".[45] WTO members
have agreed that, if they believe fellow-members are violating trade rules, they will use the
multilateral system of settling disputes instead of taking action unilaterally.[46]

The operation of the WTO dispute settlement process involves the DSB panels, the Appellate
Body, the WTO Secretariat, arbitrators, independent experts and several specialized institutions.
[47]
Bodies involved in the dispute settlement process, World Trade Organization. Several
commentators have pointed out the practical difficulty in establishing legal elements required to
bring trade remedy claim under WTO law.[48]

[edit] Accession and membership

Main article: WTO accession and membership

The process of becoming a WTO member is unique to each applicant country, and the terms of
accession are dependent upon the country's stage of economic development and current trade
regime.[49] The process takes about five years, on average, but it can last more if the country is
less than fully committed to the process or if political issues interfere.[50] As is typical of WTO
procedures, an offer of accession is only given once consensus is reached among interested
parties.[51]

[edit] Accession process

Status of WTO negotiations:

  members (including dual-representation with the European Union)

  Draft Working Party Report or Factual Summary adopted

  Goods and/or Services offers submitted

  Memorandum on Foreign Trade Regime submitted

  observer, negotiations to start later or no Memorandum on FTR submitted

  frozen procedures or no negotiations in the last 3 years

  no official interaction with the WTO

A country wishing to accede to the WTO submits an application to the General Council, and has
to describe all aspects of its trade and economic policies that have a bearing on WTO
agreements.[52] The application is submitted to the WTO in a memorandum which is examined by
a working party open to all interested WTO Members.[51]

After all necessary background information has been acquired, the working party focuses on
issues of discrepancy between the WTO rules and the applicant's international and domestic
trade policies and laws. The working party determines the terms and conditions of entry into the
WTO for the applicant nation, and may consider transitional periods to allow countries some
leeway in complying with the WTO rules.[49]

The final phase of accession involves bilateral negotiations between the applicant nation and
other working party members regarding the concessions and commitments on tariff levels and
market access for goods and services. The new member's commitments are to apply equally to all
WTO members under normal non-discrimination rules, even though they are negotiated
bilaterally.[52]

When the bilateral talks conclude, the working party sends to the general council or ministerial
conference an accession package, which includes a summary of all the working party meetings,
the Protocol of Accession (a draft membership treaty), and lists ("schedules") of the member-to-
be's commitments. Once the general council or ministerial conference approves of the terms of
accession, the applicant's parliament must ratify the Protocol of Accession before it can become
a member.[53]

[edit] Members and observers

The WTO has 153 members (almost all of the 123 nations participating in the Uruguay Round
signed on at its foundation, and the rest had to get membership).[54] The 27 states of the European
Union are represented also as the European Communities. WTO members do not have to be full
sovereign nation-members. Instead, they must be a customs territory with full autonomy in the
conduct of their external commercial relations. Thus Hong Kong (as "Hong Kong, China" since
1997) became a GATT contracting party, and the Republic of China (ROC) (commonly known
as Taiwan, whose sovereignty has been disputed by the People's Republic of China or PRC)
acceded to the WTO in 2002 under the name of "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu,
Kinmen and Matsu" (Chinese Taipei).[55]

A number of non-members (30) are observers at WTO proceedings and are currently negotiating
their membership. As observers, Iran, Iraq and Russia are not yet members. Russia is the biggest
economy outside WTO and after the completion of Russia's accession, Iran would be the biggest
economy outside the WTO.[56] With the exception of the Holy See, observers must start accession
negotiations within five years of becoming observers. Some international intergovernmental
organizations are also granted observer status to WTO bodies.[57] 14 states and 2 territories so far
have no official interaction with the WTO.

[edit] Agreements
Main article: Uruguay Round

The WTO oversees about 60 different agreements which have the status of international legal
texts. Member countries must sign and ratify all WTO agreements on accession.[58] A discussion
of some of the most important agreements follows. The Agreement on Agriculture came into
effect with the establishment of the WTO at the beginning of 1995. The AoA has three central
concepts, or "pillars": domestic support, market access and export subsidies. The General
Agreement on Trade in Services was created to extend the multilateral trading system to service
sector, in the same way the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) provides such a
system for merchandise trade. The Agreement entered into force in January 1995. The
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights sets down minimum
standards for many forms of intellectual property (IP) regulation. It was negotiated at the end of
the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1994.
The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures — also known as the
SPS Agreement was negotiated during the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade, and entered into force with the establishment of the WTO at the beginning of 1995.
Under the SPS agreement, the WTO sets constraints on members' policies relating to food safety
(bacterial contaminants, pesticides, inspection and labelling) as well as animal and plant health
(imported pests and diseases). The Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade is an international
treaty of the World Trade Organization. It was negotiated during the Uruguay Round of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and entered into force with the establishment of the
WTO at the end of 1994. The object ensures that technical negotiations and standards, as well as
testing and certification procedures, do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade".[59] The
Agreement on Customs Valuation, formally known as the Agreement on Implementation of
Article VII of GATT, prescribes methods of customs valuation that Members are to follow.
Chiefly, it adopts the "transaction value" approach.

[edit] Effectiveness
Main article: Criticism of the World Trade Organization

This section is empty. You can help by adding to it.

[edit] Directors-General

The Directors-General of the WTO have been: [60]

 Pascal Lamy, 2005-

 Supachai Panitchpakdi, 2002-2005
 Mike Moore, 1999–2002
 Renato Ruggiero, 1995–1999
 Peter Sutherland, 1995

The Directors-General of the precursor organization, GATT, were:

 Peter Sutherland, 1993-1995

 Arthur Dunkel, 1980–1993
 Olivier Long. 1968–1980
 Eric Wyndham White, 1948–1968

[edit] See also

 Agreement on Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMS)

 Anti-Globalization
 International Trade Centre
 Centre William Rappard
 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
 Non-paper
 Safeguard
 Subsidy
 Information Technology Agreement
 Swiss Formula
 Trade bloc
 Washington Consensus
 World Trade Report
 WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999 protest activity
 Global administrative law
 Globality
 Labour Standards in the World Trade Organisation
 List of countries not in the WTO
North American Free Trade Agreement
The North American Free Trade Agreement or NAFTA is an agreement signed by the
governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, creating a trilateral trade bloc in North
America. The agreement came into force on January 1, 1994. It superseded the Canada-United
States Free Trade Agreement between the U.S. and Canada. In terms of combined purchasing
power parity GDP of its members, as of 2007 the trade bloc is the largest in the world and second
largest by nominal GDP comparison.

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has two supplements, the North American
Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) and the North American Agreement on
Labor Cooperation (NAALC).
Contents
[hide]

 1 Background
 2 Negotiation and ratification
 3 Provisions
 4 Mechanisms
o 4.1 Trade
o 4.2 Industry
o 4.3 Environment
o 4.4 Agriculture
o 4.5 Mobility of persons
 5 Criticism and controversies
o 5.1 Canadian disputes
 5.1.1 Change in income trust taxation
 5.1.2 Further criticism in Canada
o 5.2 U.S. deindustrialization
o 5.3 Impact on Mexican farmers
o 5.4 Impact of NAFTA on Canada
o 5.5 Chapter 11
o 5.6 Chapter 19
o 5.7 Chapter 14
 6 See also
 7 References
 8 External links
 9 Further reading

[edit] Background

In 1988 Canada and the United States signed the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement
after which the U.S. Congress approved implementing legislation. The American government
then entered into negotiations with the Mexican government for a similar treaty, and Canada
asked to join the negotiations in order to preserve its perceived gains under the 1988 deal.[1] The
climate at the time favored expanding trade blocs, such as the Maastricht Treaty, which created
the European Union in 1992.

[edit] Negotiation and ratification

Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1986 among the three nations, the leaders met
in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W.
Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each
responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The
agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation's legislative or parliamentary branch.
Before the negotiations were finalized, Bill Clinton came into office in the U.S. and Kim
Campbell in Canada, and before the agreement became law, Jean Chrétien had taken office in
Canada.

Bill Clinton had become president of the U.S. before the agreement came into force, and is seen here
signing the U.S. implementation legislation.

The proposed Canada-U.S.trade agreement had been extremely controversial and divisive in
Canada, and the 1988 Canadian election was fought almost exclusively on that issue. In that
election more Canadians voted for anti-free trade parties (the Liberals and the New Democrats)
but more seats in parliament were won by the pro-free trade Progressive Conservatives (PCs).
Mulroney and the PCs had a parliamentary majority and were able to easily pass the Canada-
U.S. FTA and NAFTA bills. However Mulroney himself had become deeply unpopular and
resigned on June 25, 1993. He was replaced as Conservative leader and prime minister by Kim
Campbell, who then led the PC party into the 1993 election where they were decimated by the
Liberal party under Jean Chrétien. Chrétien had campaigned on a promise to renegotiate or
abrogate NAFTA but instead negotiated the two supplemental agreements with the new U.S.
president. In the U.S., Bush, who had worked to "fast track" the signing prior to the end of his
term, ran out of time and had to pass the required ratification and signing into law to incoming
president Bill Clinton. Prior to sending it to the United States Senate, Clinton introduced clauses
to protect American workers and allay the concerns of many House members. It also required
U.S. partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own. The ability
to enforce these clauses, especially with Mexico, and with much consideration and emotional
discussion the House of Representatives approved NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by a vote of
234 to 200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. NAFTA
passed the Senate 61-38. Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton
signed it into law on December 8, 1993; it went into effect on January 1, 1994.[2][3]

This section requires expansion.

[edit] Provisions

The goal of NAFTA was to eliminate barriers of trade and investment between the US, Canada
and Mexico. The implementation of NAFTA on January 1, 1994, brought the immediate
elimination of tariffs on more than one half of U.S. imports from Mexico and more than one
third of U.S. exports to Mexico. Within 10 years of the implementation of the agreement, all US-
Mexico tariffs would be eliminated except for some U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico that
were to be phased out in 15 years. Most US-Canada trade was already duty free. NAFTA also
seeks to eliminate non-tariff trade barriers.

[edit] Mechanisms

Chapter 20 provides a procedure for the interstate resolution of disputes over the application and
interpretation of the NAFTA. It was modeled after Chapter 18 of the Canada-United States Free
Trade Agreement.[4]

NAFTA's effects, both positive and negative, have been quantified by several economists, whose
findings have been reported in publications such as the World Bank's Lessons from NAFTA for
Latin America and the Caribbean,[5] NAFTA's Impact on North America,[6] and NAFTA Revisited
by the Institute for International Economics.[7] Some[who?] argue that NAFTA has been positive for
Mexico, which has seen its poverty rates fall and real income rise (in the form of lower prices,
especially food), even after accounting for the 1994–1995 economic crisis.[8] Others argue that
NAFTA has been beneficial to business owners and elites in all three countries, but has had
negative impacts on farmers in Mexico who saw food prices fall based on cheap imports from
U.S. agribusiness, and negative impacts on U.S. workers in manufacturing and assembly
industries who lost jobs. Critics also argue that NAFTA has contributed to the rising levels of
inequality in both the U.S. and Mexico. Some economists believe that NAFTA has not been
enough (or worked fast enough) to produce an economic convergence,[9] nor to substantially
reduce poverty rates. Some have suggested that in order to fully benefit from the agreement,
Mexico must invest more in education and promote innovation in infrastructure and agriculture.

[edit] Trade

According to Issac (2005), overall, NAFTA has not caused trade diversion, aside from a few
industries such as textiles and apparel, in which rules of origin negotiated in the agreement were
specifically designed to make U.S. firms prefer Mexican manufacturers. The World Bank also
showed that the combined percentage growth of NAFTA imports was accompanied by an almost
similar increase of non-NAFTA exports.

[edit] Industry

Maquiladoras (Mexican factories that take in imported raw materials and produce goods for
export) have become the landmark of trade in Mexico. These are plants that moved to this region
from the United States, hence the debate over the loss of American jobs. Hufbauer's (2005) book
shows that income in the maquiladora sector has increased 15.5% since the implementation of
NAFTA in 1994. Other sectors now benefit from the free trade agreement, and the share of
exports from non-border states has increased in the last five years while the share of exports from
maquiladora-border states has decreased. This has allowed for the rapid growth of non-border
metropolitan areas, such as Toluca, León and Puebla; all three larger in population than Tijuana,
Ciudad Juárez, and Reynosa.
[edit] Environment
For more details on this topic, see NAFTA's Impact on the Environment.

Securing U.S. congressional approval for NAFTA would have been impossible without
addressing public concerns about NAFTA’s environmental impact. The Clinton administration
negotiated a side agreement on the environment with Canada and Mexico, the North American
Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), which led to the creation of the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) in 1994. To alleviate concerns that NAFTA,
the first regional trade agreement between a developing country and two developed countries,
would have negative environmental impacts, the CEC was given a mandate to conduct ongoing
ex post environmental assessment of NAFTA.[10]

In response to this mandate, the CEC created a framework for conducting environmental analysis
of NAFTA, one of the first ex post frameworks for the environmental assessment of trade
liberalization. The framework was designed to produce a focused and systematic body of
evidence with respect to the initial hypotheses about NAFTA and the environment, such as the
concern that NAFTA would create a “race to the bottom” in environmental regulation among the
three countries, or the hope that NAFTA would pressure governments to increase their
environmental protection mechanisms.[11] The CEC has held four symposia using this framework
to evaluate the environmental impacts of NAFTA and has commissioned 47 papers on this
subject. In keeping with the CEC’s overall strategy of transparency and public involvement, the
CEC commissioned these papers from leading independent experts.[12]

Overall, none of the initial hypotheses was confirmed.[citation needed] NAFTA did not inherently
present a systemic threat to the North American environment, as was originally feared, apart
from potentially the Investor state dispute settlement provisions of Ch 11. NAFTA-related
environmental threats instead occurred in specific areas where government environmental policy,
infrastructure, or mechanisms, were unprepared for the increasing scale of production under
trade liberalization.[citation needed] In some cases, environmental policy was neglected in the wake of
trade liberalization; in other cases, NAFTA's measures for investment protection, such as
Chapter 11, and measures against non-tariff trade barriers, threatened to discourage more
vigorous environmental policy.[13] The most serious overall increases in pollution due to NAFTA
were found in the base metals sector, the Mexican petroleum sector, and the transportation
equipment sector in the United States and Mexico, but not in Canada.[14]

[edit] Agriculture

From the earliest negotiation, agriculture was (and still remains) a controversial topic within
NAFTA, as it has been with almost all free trade agreements that have been signed within the
WTO framework. Agriculture is the only section that was not negotiated trilaterally; instead,
three separate agreements were signed between each pair of parties. The Canada–U.S. agreement
contains significant restrictions and tariff quotas on agricultural products (mainly sugar, dairy,
and poultry products), whereas the Mexico–U.S. pact allows for a wider liberalization within a
framework of phase-out periods (it was the first North–South FTA on agriculture to be signed).
The overall effect of the Mexico–U.S. agricultural agreement is a matter of dispute. Mexico did
not invest in the infrastructure necessary for competition, such as efficient railroads and
highways, creating more difficult living conditions for the country's poor. Still, the causes of
rural poverty cannot be directly attributed to NAFTA[citation needed]; in fact, Mexico's agricultural
exports increased 9.4 percent annually between 1994 and 2001, while imports increased by only
6.9 percent a year during the same period.[15]

One of the most affected agricultural sectors is the meat industry. Mexico has gone from a small-
key player in the pre-1994 U.S. export market to the 2nd largest importer of U.S. agricultural
products in 2004, and NAFTA may be credited as a major catalyst for this change. The
allowance of free trade removed the hurdles that impeded business between the two countries.
As a result, Mexico has provided a growing meat market for the U.S., leading to an increase in
sales and profits for the U.S. meat industry. This coincides with a noticeable increase in Mexican
per capita GDP that has created large changes in meat consumption patterns, implying that
Mexicans can now afford to buy more meat and thus per capita meat consumption has grown.[16]

Production of corn in Mexico has increased since NAFTA's implementation. However, internal
corn demand has increased beyond Mexico's sufficiency, and imports have become necessary,
far beyond the quotas Mexico had originally negotiated.[17] Zahniser & Coyle have also pointed
out that corn prices in Mexico, adjusted for international prices, have drastically decreased, yet
through a program of subsidies expanded by former president Vicente Fox, production has
remained stable since 2000.[18]

The logical result of a lower commodity price is that more use of it is made downstream.
Unfortunately, many of the same rural people who would have been likely to produce higher-
margin value-added products in Mexico have instead emigrated. The rise in corn prices due to
increased ethanol demand may improve the situation of corn farmers in Mexico.

In a study published in the August 2008 issue of the American Journal of Agricultural
Economics, NAFTA has increased U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico and Canada even though
most of this increase occurred a decade after its ratification. The study focused on the effects that
gradual "phase-in" periods in regional trade agreements, including NAFTA, have on trade flows.
Most of the increase in members’ agricultural trade, which was only recently brought under the
purview of the World Trade Organization, was due to very high trade barriers before NAFTA or
other regional trade agreements.[19]

[edit] Mobility of persons

According to the Department of Homeland Security Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, during

fiscal year 2006 (i.e., October 2005 through September 2006), 73,880 foreign professionals
(64,633 Canadians and 9,247 Mexicans) were admitted into the United States for temporary
employment under NAFTA (i.e., in the TN status). Additionally, 17,321 of their family members
(13,136 Canadians, 2,904 Mexicans, as well as a number of third-country nationals married to
Canadians and Mexicans) entered the U.S. in the treaty national's dependent (TD) status.[20]
Because DHS counts the number of the new I-94 arrival records filled at the border, and the TN-
1 admission is valid for three years, the number of non-immigrants in TN status present in the
U.S. at the end of the fiscal year is approximately equal to the number of admissions during the
year. (A discrepancy may be caused by some TN entrants leaving the country or changing status
before their three-year admission period has expired, while other immigrants admitted earlier
may change their status to TN or TD, or extend TN status granted earlier).

Canadian authorities estimated that, as of December 1, 2006, a total of 24,830 U.S. citizens and
15,219 Mexican citizens were present in Canada as "foreign workers". These numbers include
both entrants under the NAFTA agreement and those who have entered under other provisions of
the Canadian immigration law.[21] New entries of foreign workers in 2006 were 16,841 (U.S.
citizens) and 13,933 (Mexicans).[22]

[edit] Criticism and controversies

[edit] Canadian disputes
This article is outdated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available
information. Please see the talk page for more information. (August 2009)

Garment workers assemble suits in a Toronto factory in 1901

There is much concern in Canada over the provision that if something is sold even once as a
commodity, the government cannot stop its sale in the future.[23] This applies to the water from
Canada's lakes and rivers, fueling fears over the possible destruction of Canadian ecosystems and
water supply.

In 1999, Sun Belt Water Inc., a company out of Santa Barbara, California, filed an Arbitration
Claim under Chapter 11 of the NAFTA claiming $105 million as a result of Canada's prohibition
on the export of bulk water by marine tanker, a move that destroyed the Sun Belt business
venture. The claim sent shock waves through Canadian governments that scrambled to update
water legislation and remains unresolved.

Other fears come from the effects NAFTA has had on Canadian lawmaking. In 1996, the
gasoline additive MMT was brought into Canada by an American company. At the time, the
Canadian federal government banned the importation of the additive. The American company
brought a claim under NAFTA Chapter 11 seeking US$201 million,[24] and by Canadian
provinces under the Agreement on Internal Trade ("AIT"). The American company argued that
their additive had not been conclusively linked to any health dangers, and that the prohibition
was damaging to their company. Following a finding that the ban was a violation of the AIT,[25]
the Canadian federal government repealed the ban and settled with the American company for
US$13 million.[26] Studies by Health and Welfare Canada (now Health Canada) on the health
effects of MMT in fuel found no significant health effects associated with exposure to these
exhaust emissions. Other Canadian researchers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
disagree with Health Canada, and cite studies that include possible nerve damage.[27]

Ponderosa Pine logs taken from Malheur National Forest, Grant County, Oregon.

The United States and Canada had been arguing for years over the United States' decision to
impose a 27 percent duty on Canadian softwood lumber imports, until new Canadian Prime
Minister Stephen Harper compromised with the United States and reached a settlement on July 1,
2006.[28] The settlement has not yet been ratified by either country, in part due to domestic
opposition in Canada.

Canada had filed numerous motions to have the duty eliminated and the collected duties returned
to Canada.[29] After the United States lost an appeal from a NAFTA panel, it responded by saying
"We are, of course, disappointed with the [NAFTA panel's] decision, but it will have no impact
on the anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders." (Nick Lifton, spokesman for U.S. Trade
Representative Rob Portman)[30] On July 21, 2006, the United States Court of International Trade
found that imposition of the duties was contrary to U.S. law.[31][32]

[edit] Change in income trust taxation

On October 30, 2007, American citizens Marvin and Elaine Gottlieb filed a Notice of Intent to
Submit a Claim to Arbitration under NAFTA. The couple claims thousands of U.S. investors lost
a total of $5 billion dollars in the fall-out from the Conservative Government's decision the
previous year to change the tax rate on income trusts in the energy sector. On April 29, 2009, a
determination was made that this change in tax law was not expropriation.[33]

[edit] Further criticism in Canada

A book written by Mel Hurtig published in 2002 called The Vanishing Country charged that
since NAFTA's ratification more than 10,000 Canadian companies had been taken over by
foreigners, and that 98% of all foreign direct investments in Canada were for foreign takeovers.
[34]

[edit] U.S. deindustrialization

For more details on this topic, see NAFTA's effect on United States employment.
Studies done by Kate Bronfenbrenner at Cornell University showed the adverse effect of plants
threatening to move to Mexico because of NAFTA. [35]

An increase in domestic manufacturing output and a proportionally greater domestic investment

in manufacturing does not necessarily mean an increase in domestic manufacturing jobs; this
increase may simply reflect greater automation and higher productivity. Although the U.S. total
civilian employment may have grown by almost 15 million in between 1993 and 2001,
manufacturing jobs only increased by 476,000 in the same time period.[36] Furthermore from
1994 to 2007, net manufacturing employment has declined by 3,654,000, and during this period
several other free trade agreements have been concluded or expanded.[36]

[edit] Impact on Mexican farmers

In 2000, U.S. government subsidies to the corn sector totaled $10.1 billion. These subsidies have
led to charges of dumping, which jeopardizes Mexican farms and the country's food self-
sufficiency.

Other studies reject NAFTA as the force responsible for depressing the incomes of poor corn
farmers, citing the trend's existence more than a decade before NAFTA's existence, an increase
in maize production after NAFTA went into effect in 1994, and the lack of a measurable impact
on the price of Mexican corn due to subsidized corn coming into Mexico from the United States,
though they agree that the abolition of U.S. agricultural subsidies would benefit Mexican
farmers.[37] According to Graham Purchase in Anarchism and Environmental Survival, NAFTA
could cause "the destruction of the ejidos (peasant cooperative village holdings) by corporate
interests, and threatens to completely reverse the gains made by rural peoples in the Mexican
Revolution."[38]

[edit] Impact of NAFTA on Canada

Canada gained the most from NAFTA with Canada's GDP rate at 3.6%, growing faster than the
United States at 3.3% and Mexico at 2.7%. Canadian employment levels have also shown steady
gains in recent years, with overall employment rising from 14.9 million to 15.7 million in the
early 2000s. Even Canadian manufacturing employment held steady. One of NAFTA's biggest
economic effects on U.S.-Canada trade has been to boost bilateral agricultural flows.[39] In the
year 2008 alone, Canada exports to the United States and Mexico was at CAN$381.3 Billion
Dollars and imports from NAFTA was at CAN$245.1 Billion Dollars.[40] The Canadian
mainstream has been so unanimous in its recognition of NAFTA's advantages despite a few odd
detractors that even former NDP Gary Doer of Manitoba openly praises the benefits of NAFTA.
[41]

[edit] Chapter 11

Another contentious issue is the impact of the Investor state dispute settlement obligations
contained in Chapter 11 of the NAFTA.[42] Chapter 11 allows corporations or individuals to sue
Mexico, Canada or the United States for compensation when actions taken by those governments
(or by those for whom they are responsible at international law, such as provincial, state, or
municipal governments) have adversely affected their investments.

This chapter has been invoked in cases where governments have passed laws or regulations with
intent to protect their constituents and their resident businesses' profits. Language in the chapter
defining its scope states that it cannot be used to "prevent a Party from providing a service or
performing a function such as law enforcement, correctional services, income security or
insurance, social security or insurance, social welfare, public education, public training, health,
and child care, in a manner that is not inconsistent with this Chapter."[43]

This chapter has been criticized by groups in the U.S.,[44] Mexico,[45] and Canada[46] for a variety
of reasons, including not taking into account important social and environmental[47]
considerations. In Canada, several groups, including the Council of Canadians, challenged the
constitutionality of Chapter 11. They lost at the trial level,[48] and have subsequently appealed.

Methanex Corporation, a Canadian corporation, filed a US$970 million suit against the United
States, claiming that a California ban on Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), a substance that had
found its way into many wells in the state, was hurtful to the corporation's sales of methanol.
However, the claim was rejected, and the company was ordered to pay US$3 million to the U.S.
government in costs.[49]

In another case, Metalclad, an American corporation, was awarded US$15.6 million from
Mexico after a Mexican municipality refused a construction permit for the hazardous waste
landfill it intended to construct in Guadalcázar, San Luis Potosí. The construction had already
been approved by the federal government with various environmental requirements imposed (see
paragraph 48 of the tribunal decision). The NAFTA panel found that the municipality did not
have the authority to ban construction on the basis of the environmental concerns.[50]

[edit] Chapter 19

Also contentious is NAFTA's Chapter 19, which subjects antidumping and countervailing duty
(AD/CVD) determinations with binational panel review instead of, or in addition to,
conventional judicial review. For example, in the United States, review of agency decisions
imposing antidumping and countervailing duties are normally heard before the U.S. Court of
International Trade, an Article III court. NAFTA parties, however, have the option of appealing
the decisions to binational panels composed of five citizens from the two relevant NAFTA
countries. The panelists are generally lawyers experienced in international trade law. Since the
NAFTA does not include substantive provisions concerning AD/CVD, the panel is charged with
determining whether final agency determinations involving AD/CVD conform with the country's
domestic law. Chapter 19 can be considered as somewhat of an anomaly in international dispute
settlement since it does not apply international law, but requires a panel composed of individuals
from many countries to reexamine the application of one country's domestic law.

A Chapter 19 panel is expected to examine whether the agency's determination is supported by

"substantial evidence." This standard assumes significant deference to the domestic agency.

Some of the most controversial trade disputes in recent years, such as the U.S.-Canada softwood
lumber dispute, have been litigated before Chapter 19 panels.

Decisions by Chapter 19 panels can be challenged before a NAFTA extraordinary challenge

committee. However, an extraordinary challenge committee does not function as an ordinary
appeal. Under the NAFTA, it will only vacate or remand a decision if the decision involves a
significant and material error that threatens the integrity of the NAFTA dispute settlement
system. As of January 2006, no NAFTA party has successfully challenged a Chapter 19 panel's
decision before an extraordinary challenge committee.

[edit] Chapter 14
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do
not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (August 2009)

"This chapter dealing with Financial Services provides for the same procedure as Chapter 20,
except that the members of the panel shall be selected from a roster of fifteen persons who "have
expertise in financial services law or practice..." The roster has never been made public and no
dispute has yet occurred under this chapter."[51]

The provining a roster of 15 available people to form a committee for dispute resolution is
shown, quite clearly, in Article 1414.[52]

[edit] See also

Canada portal

Mexico portal

United States portal

 European Union
 European Economic Area
 European Free Trade Association
 Economic Community of West African States
International Trade Centre
The International Trade Centre (ITC) is the joint agency of the World Trade Organization and
the United Nations.

The following statement about the ITC is taken verbatim from its website, and reflects the ITC's
official view of its own functions:

"ITC enables small business export success in developing countries by providing, with partners,
trade development solutions to the private sector, trade support institutions and policy-makers."

ITC works in six areas:

 Product and market development

 Development of trade support services
  Trade information
 Human resource development
 International purchasing and supply management
 Needs assessment, programme design for trade promotion

ITC’s technical assistance concentrates on the three issues for which it believes the need for
national capacity-building is most critical: helping businesses understand WTO rules;
strengthening enterprise competitiveness; and developing new trade promotion strategies.

[edit] Market Analysis Services and Tools

Market Analysis Services (MAS) are part of the Programme of Product and Market
Development of the International Trade Centre (ITC) UNCTAD/WTO. Through MAS services,
ITC provides on-line tools, disseminates market research and trade analysis, and conducts
training programmes in market analysis for trade support institutions and the business
community in developing countries.

 Trade Map - Trade statistics for international trade development [1]

 Market Access Map - UN's ITC website for accessible tariff information [2]
 Investment Map - Foreign Direct Investment statistical data together with foreign companies,
international trade and tariffs [3]
 Tailored Studies - Trade-related, tailor-made research and market analysis [4]
 Capacity Building - Providing foundations for successful export strategies [5]

[edit] Enterprise Competitiveness

ITC’s Enterprise Competitiveness section (EC) specializes in private sector development by

delivering capacity building programs that increase the sustainability of high-quality business
development services. EC interventions focus on prioritized sectors with high export potential
and identified opportunities for sustainable pro-poor income generation. EC leverages a strategic
partner network to provide clusters of SMEs with technical assistance to enhance productivity,
innovation and international competitiveness.

EC activities focus on:

 Meeting the needs of market support actors, i.e. Business Development Service Providers
(BDSPs); and
 Providing export facilitation solutions and direct technical assistance to clusters of SMEs.

Development of export knowledge and the transfer of quality skills are integral to EC’s work,
articulated around three Practice Areas:

 Export Management Development;

 Enterprise Value Chain; and
 Export Marketing and Branding
EC offers a comprehensive package of modular training programs targeted to export
professionals and business development service providers in developing countries.

Programs can be customized to different audience situations and toolkits are designed to deliver
practical solutions in a ‘how to’ mode. Capacity building can be delivered to community micro-
enterprises, gender or other cross-cutting requirement.

European Union
The European Union (EU) is an economic and political union of 27 member states which are
located primarily in Europe.[7] The EU traces its origins from the European Coal and Steel
Community (ECSC) and the European Economic Community (EEC) formed by six countries in
the 1950s. In the intervening years the EU has grown, in size, by the accession of new member
states and, in power, by the addition of policy areas to its remit. The Maastricht Treaty
established the European Union under its current name in 1993.[8] The last amendment to the
constitutional basis of the EU, the Treaty of Lisbon, came into force in 2009.

The EU operates through a hybrid system of supranational independent institutions and

intergovernmentally made decisions negotiated by the member states.[9][10][11] Important
institutions of the EU include the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the
European Council, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Central Bank.
The European Parliament is elected every five years by EU citizens.

The EU has developed a single market through a standardised system of laws which apply in all
member states including the abolition of passport controls within the Schengen area.[12] It ensures
the free movement of people, goods, services, and capital,[13] enacts legislation in justice and
home affairs, and maintains common policies on trade,[14] agriculture,[15] fisheries and regional
development.[16] A monetary union, the eurozone, was established in 1999 and is currently
composed of seventeen member states. Through the Common Foreign and Security Policy the
EU has developed a limited role in external relations and defence. Permanent diplomatic
missions have been established around the world and the EU is represented at the United
Nations, the WTO, the G8 and the G-20.

With a combined population of 500 million inhabitants,[17] the EU generated an estimated 21%

(US$ 14.8 trillion) share of the global economy (GDP PPP) in 2009.[18] As a trading bloc the EU
accounts for 20% of global imports and exports.
Contents
[hide]

 1 History
o 1.1 Outline
 1.1.1 1945–1958
 1.1.2 1958–1972
 1.1.3 1973–1993
 1.1.4 1993–2011
o 1.2 Treaties
 2 Geography
o 2.1 Member states
o 2.2 Environment
 3 Politics
o 3.1 Governance
 3.1.1 European Council
 3.1.2 Commission
 3.1.3 Parliament
 3.1.4 Council
o 3.2 Budget
o 3.3 Competences
 4 Legal system
o 4.1 Courts of Justice
o 4.2 Fundamental rights
o 4.3 Acts
 5 Justice and home affairs
 6 Foreign relations
o 6.1 Military
o 6.2 Humanitarian aid
 7 Economy
o 7.1 Internal market
o 7.2 Monetary union
o 7.3 Competition
o 7.4 Agriculture
o 7.5 Energy
o 7.6 Infrastructure
 8 Education and science
 9 Demographics
o 9.1 Urbanization
o 9.2 Languages
o 9.3 Religion
 10 Culture
 11 See also
 12 References
  13 External links

[edit] History
Main article: History of the European Union

[edit] Outline

[edit] 1945–1958
Main article: History of the European Coal and Steel Community (1945–1957)

Robert Schuman proposing the Coal and Steel Community on 9 May 1950.

After World War II, moves towards European integration were seen by many as an escape from
the extreme forms of nationalism which had devastated the continent.[19] One such attempt to
unite Europeans was the European Coal and Steel Community which, while having the modest
aim of centralised control of the previously national coal and steel industries of its member
states, was declared to be "a first step in the federation of Europe".[20] The founding members of
the Community were Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany.
The originators and supporters of the Community include Jean Monnet, Robert Schuman, Paul
Henri Spaak, and Alcide De Gasperi. [21]

In 1957, the six countries signed the Treaties of Rome, which extended the earlier cooperation
within the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and created the European Economic
Community, (EEC) establishing a customs union and the European Atomic Energy Community
(Euratom) for cooperation in developing nuclear energy. The treaty came into force in 1958.[21]

[edit] 1958–1972
Main article: History of the European Communities (1958–1972)
The Rome Treaty was signed in 1957 and came into force in 1958. It created two additional European
Communities, most notably the European Economic Community.

The two new communities were created separately from ECSC, although they shared the same
courts and the Common Assembly. The executives of the new communities were called
Commissions, as opposed to the "High Authority". The EEC was headed by Walter Hallstein
(Hallstein Commission) and Euratom was headed by Louis Armand (Armand Commission) and
then Etienne Hirsch. Euratom would integrate sectors in nuclear energy while the EEC would
develop a customs union between members.[22][23][24]

Throughout the 1960s tensions began to show with France seeking to limit supranational power.
However, in 1965 an agreement was reached and hence in 1967 the Merger Treaty was signed in
Brussels. It came into force on 1 July 1967 and created a single set of institutions for the three
communities, which were collectively referred to as the European Communities (EC), although
commonly just as the European Community.[25][26] Jean Rey presided over the first merged
Commission (Rey Commission).[27]

[edit] 1973–1993
Main article: History of the European Communities (1973–1993)

The Iron Curtain's fall in 1989 enabled eastward enlargement. (Berlin Wall)

In 1973 the Communities enlarged to include Denmark (including Greenland which later left the
Community in 1985), Ireland, and the United Kingdom.[28] Norway had negotiated to join at the
same time but Norwegian voters rejected membership in a referendum and so Norway remained
outside. In 1979, the first direct, democratic elections to the European Parliament were held.[29]

Greece joined in 1981, and Spain with Portugal in 1986.[30] In 1985, the Schengen Agreement led
the way toward the creation of open borders without passport controls between most member
states and some non-member states.[31] In 1986, the European flag began to be used by the
Community[32] and the Single European Act was signed.

In 1990, after the fall of the Iron Curtain, the former East Germany became part of the
Community as part of a newly united Germany.[33] With enlargement towards Eastern and
Central Europe on the agenda, the Copenhagen criteria for candidate members to join the
European Union were agreed.

[edit] 1993–2011
Main articles: History of the European Union (1993–2004) and History of the European Union (2004
onwards)

The introduction of the euro in 2002 replaced several national currencies.

The European Union was formally established when the Maastricht Treaty came into force on 1
November 1993,[8] and in 1995 Austria, Sweden, and Finland joined the newly established EU. In
2002, euro notes and coins replaced national currencies in 12 of the member states. Since then,
the eurozone has increased to encompass seventeen countries. In 2004, the EU saw its biggest
enlargement to date when Malta, Cyprus, Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech
Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary joined the Union.[34]

On 1 January 2007, Romania and Bulgaria became the EU's newest members. In the same year
Slovenia adopted the euro,[34] followed in 2008 by Cyprus and Malta, by Slovakia in 2009 and by
Estonia in 2011. In June 2009, the 2009 Parliament elections were held leading to a renewal of
Barroso's Commission Presidency, and in July 2009 Iceland formally applied for EU
membership.

On 1 December 2009, the Lisbon Treaty entered into force and reformed many aspects of the
EU. In particular it changed the legal structure of the European Union, merging the EU three
pillars system into a single legal entity provisioned with legal personality, and it created a
permanent President of the European Council, the first of which is Herman Van Rompuy, and a
strengthened High Representative, Catherine Ashton.[35]

[edit] Treaties
Signed 1948 195 1954 1957 1965 1975 1985 1986 1992 1997 2001 2007
In forc 1948 1 1955 1958 1967 N/A 1985 1987 1993 1999 2003 2009
e Bruss 195 Modifi Rome Merg Europe Schen Single Maastric Amster Nice Lisbon
Docum els 2 ed Trea er an gen European Act ht dam Treaty Treaty
ent Treat Pari Bruss ties Treat Council Treaty Treaty Treaty
y s els y conclus
Trea Treaty ion
ty

         
       
Three pillars of the Europea
   
n Union:
   
European  Communities:  

European Atomic Energy

Community (EURATOM)

European Coal and Steel Treaty expired in Europe

Community (ECSC) 2002 an
  Union
European Economic Community
(EEC)
European
Community (EC)
Schengen
           
Area

   
 
Justice
and
Police and Judicial
TREVI Home
Co-operation in
Affairs  
Criminal Matters
(JHA)
    (PJCC)

European
Political Common Foreign and
         
Cooperation ( Security Policy (CFSP)
EPC)

Unconsolid Western European Union (WEU)    

 ated
bodies Treaty terminated in
 
2010

                        v·d·e

[edit] Geography
Main article: Geography of the European Union

Mont Blanc in the Alps is the highest peak in the EU.

The territory of the EU consists of the combined territories of its 27 member states with some
exceptions, outlined below. The territory of the EU is not the same as that of Europe, as parts of
the continent are outside the EU. Some parts of member states are not part of the EU, despite
forming part of the European continent (for example the Isle of Man and Channel Islands (three
Crown Dependencies), and the Faroe Islands (a territory of Denmark)). The island country of
Cyprus, a member of the EU, is closer to Turkey than to continental Europe and is often
considered part of Asia.[36][37] Several territories associated with member states that are outside
geographic Europe are also not part of the EU (such as Greenland and Aruba). Some overseas
territories are part of the EU even though geographically not part of Europe, such as the Azores,
French Guiana, Martinique and Melilla. As well, although being technically part of the EU,[38]
EU law is suspended in Northern Cyprus as it is under the de facto control of the Turkish
Republic of North Cyprus, a self-proclaimed state that is recognised only by Turkey.
The EU's climate is influenced by its 65,993 km (41,006 mi) coastline. (Crete)

The EU's member states cover an area of 4,422,773 square kilometres (1,707,642 sq mi).[nb 3] The
EU is larger in area than all but six countries, and its highest peak is Mont Blanc in the Graian
Alps, 4,810.45 metres (15,782 ft) above sea level.[39] The lowest point in the EU is
Zuidplaspolder in the Netherlands, at −7 m (−23 ft) below sea level. The landscape, climate, and
economy of the EU are influenced by its coastline, which is 65,993 kilometres (41,006 mi) long.
The EU has the world's second-longest coastline, after Canada. The combined member states
share land borders with 19 non-member states for a total of 12,441 kilometres (7,730 mi), the
fifth-longest border in the world.[10][40][41]

Including the overseas territories of member states, the EU experiences most types of climate
from Arctic to sub-tropical, rendering meteorological averages for the EU as a whole
meaningless. The majority of the people lives in areas with a Mediterranean climate (Southern
Europe), a temperate maritime climate (Western Europe), or a warm summer continental or
hemiboreal climate (Eastern Europe).[42]

The EU's population is highly urbanised, with some 75% of inhabitants (and growing, projected
to be 90% in 7 states by 2020) living in urban areas. Cities are largely spread out across the EU,
although with a large grouping in and around the Benelux. An increasing percentage of this is
due to low density urban sprawl which is extending into natural areas. In some cases this urban
growth has been due to the influx of EU funds into a region.[43]

[edit] Member states

Main article: Member State of the European Union

See also: Special Member State territories and the European Union, Enlargement of the European
Union, Future enlargement of the European Union, and Withdrawal from the European Union
The continental territories of the member states of the European Union (European Communities pre-
1993), animated in order of accession.

Albania

Austria

Belarus

Belgium

Bos.
& Herz.

Bulgaria

Croatia

Cyprus

Czech
Rep.

Denmark

Estonia

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Hungary

Iceland

Ireland

Italy

Latvia

Lithuania

Luxembourg

Mac.

Malta→

Moldova

Mont.
 Netherlands

Norway

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Russia

Serbia

Slovakia

Slovenia

Spain

Sweden

 Switz-
erland

Turkey

Ukraine

United
Kingdom

The European Union is composed of 27 sovereign Member States: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria,
Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary,
Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Republic of
Ireland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.[44] The Union's
membership has grown from the original six founding states—Belgium, France, (then-West)
Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands—to the present day 27 by successive
enlargements as countries acceded to the treaties and by doing so, pooled their sovereignty in
exchange for representation in the institutions.[45] To join the EU a country must meet the
Copenhagen criteria, defined at the 1993 Copenhagen European Council. These require a stable
democracy that respects human rights and the rule of law; a functioning market economy capable
of competition within the EU; and the acceptance of the obligations of membership, including
EU law. Evaluation of a country's fulfilment of the criteria is the responsibility of the European
Council.[46] No member state has ever left the Union, although Greenland (an autonomous
province of Denmark) withdrew in 1985.[47] The Lisbon Treaty now provides a clause dealing
with how a member leaves the EU.[48]

There are five official candidate countries, Croatia, Iceland, Macedonia,[nb 4][49] Montenegro and
Turkey. Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia are officially recognised as potential
candidates.[50] Kosovo is also listed as a potential candidate but the European Commission does
not list it as an independent country because not all member states recognise it as an independent
country separate from Serbia.[51]

Four Western European countries that are not EU members have partly committed to the EU's
economy and regulations: Iceland (a candidate country for EU membership), Liechtenstein and
Norway, which are a part of the single market through the European Economic Area, and
Switzerland, which has similar ties through bilateral treaties.[52][53] The relationships of the
European microstates, Andorra, Monaco, San Marino and the Vatican include the use of the euro
and other areas of cooperation.[54]

[edit] Environment
Further information: European Commissioner for the Environment and European Climate Change
Programme

The Danube Delta in Romania with its diverse bird population is a "Special Protection Area" created by
EU directives.

The first environmental policy of the European Community was launched in 1972. Since then it
has addressed issues such as acid rain, the thinning of the ozone layer, air quality, noise
pollution, waste and water pollution. The Water Framework Directive is an example of a water
policy, aiming for rivers, lakes, ground and coastal waters to be of "good quality" by 2015.
Wildlife is protected through the Natura 2000 programme and covers 30,000 sites throughout
Europe.[55] In 2007, the Polish government sought to build a motorway through the Rospuda
valley, but the Commission has been blocking construction as the valley is a wildlife area
covered by the programme.[56]

In 2007, member states agreed that the EU is to use 20% renewable energy in the future and that
it has to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in 2020 by at least 20% compared to 1990 levels.[57]
This includes measures that in 2020, 10% of the overall fuel quantity used by cars and trucks in
EU 27 should be running on renewable energy such as biofuels. This is considered to be one of
the most ambitious moves of an important industrialised region to fight global warming.[58]

[edit] Politics
Main article: Politics of the European Union
The ordinary legislative procedure of the European Union.

The EU operates solely within those competencies conferred on it upon the treaties and
according to the principle of subsidiarity (which dictates that action by the EU should only be
taken where an objective cannot be sufficiently achieved by the member states alone). Laws
made by the EU institutions are passed in a variety of forms, generally speaking they can be
classified into two groups: those which come into force without the necessity for national
implementation measures, and those which specifically require national implementation
measures.[59]

[edit] Governance
Main articles: EU institutions and Legislature of the European Union

The European Union has of the seven institutions: the European Parliament, the Council of the
European Union, the European Commission, the European Council, the European Central Bank,
the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Auditors. Competencies in
scrutinising and amending legislation are divided between the European Parliament and the
Council of the European Union while executive tasks are carried out by the European
Commission and in a limited capacity by the European Council (not to be confused with the
aforementioned Council of the European Union). The monetary policy of the eurozone is
governed by the European Central Bank. The interpretation and the application of EU law and
the treaties are ensured by the Court of Justice of the European Union. There are also a number
of ancillary bodies which advise the EU or operate in a specific area.

[edit] European Council

President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy

The European Council gives direction to the EU, and convenes at least four times a year. It
comprises the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission and
one representative per member state; either its head of state or head of government. The
European Council has been described by some as the Union's "supreme political authority".[60] It
is actively involved in the negotiation of the treaty changes and defines the EU's policy agenda
and strategies.

The European Council uses its leadership role to sort out disputes between member states and the
institutions, and to resolve political crises and disagreements over controversial issues and
policies. It acts externally as a "collective Head of State" and ratifies important documents (e.g.
international agreements and treaties).[61]

On 19 November 2009, Herman Van Rompuy was chosen as the first permanent President of the
European Council. On 1 December 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force and he assumed
office. Ensuring the external representation of the EU,[62] driving consensus and settling
divergences among members are tasks for the President both during the convocations of the
European Council and in the time periods between them. The European Council should not be
mistaken for the Council of Europe, an international organisation independent from the EU.

[edit] Commission

Commission President José Manuel Barroso

The European Commission acts as the EU's executive arm and is responsible for initiating
legislation and the day-to-day running of the EU. The commission is also seen as the motor of
European integration. The Commission operates as a cabinet government, with 27
Commissioners for different areas of policy, one from each member state, though
Commissioners are bound to represent the interests of the EU as a whole rather than their home
state.
One of the 27 is the Commission President (currently José Manuel Durão Barroso) appointed by
the European Council. The other 26 Commissioners are subsequently appointed by the Council
of the European Union in agreement with the nominated President, and then the 27
Commissioners as a single body are subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament.
After the President, the most prominent Commissioner is the High Representative of the Union
for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy who is ex-officio Vice President of the Commission.[63]

[edit] Parliament

The European Parliament building in Strasbourg

The European Parliament (EP) forms one half of the EU's legislature (the other half is the
Council of the European Union, see below). The 736 (soon to be 751) Members of the European
Parliament (MEPs) are directly elected by EU citizens every five years on the basis of
proportional representation to the share of votes collected by each political party. Although
MEPs are elected on a national basis, they sit according to political groups rather than their
nationality. Each country has a set number of seats and is divided into sub-national
constituencies where this does not affect the proportional nature of the voting system.[64]

The Parliament and the Council of the European Union pass legislation jointly in nearly all areas
under the ordinary legislative procedure. This also applies to the EU budget. Finally, the
Commission is accountable to Parliament, requiring its approval to take office, having to report
back to it and subject to motions of censure from it. The President of the European Parliament
carries out the role of speaker in parliament and represents it externally. The EP President and
Vice Presidents are elected by MEPs every two and a half years.[65]

[edit] Council

The Council of the European Union (also called the "Council"[66] and sometimes referred to as
the "Council of Ministers"[67]) forms the other half of the EU's legislature. It consists of a
government minister from each member state and meets in different compositions depending on
the policy area being addressed. Notwithstanding its different compositions, it is considered to be
one single body.[68] In addition to its legislative functions, the Council also exercises executive
functions in relations to the Common Foreign and Security Policy.
[edit] Budget
Main article: Budget of the European Union

The total expenditure of the European Union in 2006. [69]

The twenty-seven member state EU had an agreed budget of €120.7 billion for the year 2007 and
€864.3 billion for the period 2007–2013,[70] representing 1.10% and 1.05% of the EU-27's GNI
forecast for the respective periods. By comparison, the United Kingdom's expenditure for 2004
was estimated to be €759 billion, and France was estimated to have spent €801 billion. In 1960,
the budget of the then European Economic Community was 0.03% of GDP.[71]

In the 2010 budget of €141.5 billion, the largest single expenditure item is cohesion &
competitiveness with around 45% of the total budget.[72] Next comes agriculture with
approximately 31% of the total.[72] Rural development, environment and fisheries takes up
around 11%.[72] Administration accounts for around 6%.[72] The EU as a global partner and
citizenship, freedom, security and justice bring up the rear with approximately 6% and 1%
respectively.[72]

The EU fifth institution, the European Court of Auditors ensures that the budget of the European
Union has been properly accounted for. The court provides an audit report for each financial year
to the Council and Parliament. The Parliament uses this to decide whether to approve the
Commission's handling of the budget. The Court also gives opinions and proposals on financial
legislation and anti-fraud actions.[73]

The Court of Auditors is legally obliged to provide the European European Parliament and the
Council with "a statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and
regularity of the underlying transactions".[74] The Court has not given an unqualified approval of
the Union's accounts since 1993.[75] In their report on 2009 the auditors found that five areas of
Union expenditure, agriculture and the cohesion fund, were materially affected by error.[76] The
EC estimated that the financial impact of irregularities was €1,863 million.[77]

[edit] Competences

EU member states retain all powers not explicitly handed to the Union. In some areas the EU
enjoys exclusive competence. These are areas in which member states have renounced any
capacity to enact legislation. In other areas the EU and its member states share the competence to
legislate. While both can legislate, member states can only legislate to the extent to which the EU
has not. In other policy areas the EU can only co-ordinate, support and supplement member state
action but cannot enact legislation with the aim of harmonising national laws.[78]

That a particular policy area falls into a certain category of competence is not necessarily
indicative of what legislative procedure is used for enacting legislation within that policy area.
Different legislative procedures are used within the same category of competence, and even with
the same policy area.

The distribution of competences in various policy areas between Member States and the Union is
divided in the following three categories:

As outlined in Part I, Title I of the consolidated Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union:       view ·
talk · edit

Exclusive Shared competence: Supporting

competence: "Union exercise of
competence:
"Member States cannot
competence shall not Member States' actions
"The Union has exercise competence in
result in Member States in:"
exclusive competence areas where the Union
being prevented from
to make directives and has done so."
exercising theirs in:"
conclude international
agreements when  the internal  research,
provided for in a Union  industry
market technological
 culture
legislative act."  social policy, for development
 tourism
the aspects and space
 education, youth,
 the customs defined in this  development
Treaty cooperation, sport and
union
 economic, social humanitarian aid vocational training
 the
 civil protection
establishing of and territorial
cohesion (disaster
the
 agriculture and "The Union coordinates prevention)
competition
Member States policies  administrative
rules fisheries,
excluding the or implements cooperation
necessary for
the functioning conservation of supplemental to theirs
of the internal marine biological common policies, not
market resources covered elsewhere"
 monetary  environment
policy for the  consumer
 coordination of
Member protection
economic,
States whose  transport
employment and
currency is the  trans-European
social policies
euro networks
 common foreign,
 the  energy
security and
conservation  the area of
defence policies
 of marine
biological
resources
under the
common
fisheries policy freedom,
 common security and
commercial justice
policy  common safety
concerns in

[edit] Legal system

Further information: EU Law, EU treaties, and Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

The last amendment to the constitutional basis of the EU came into force in 2009 and was the Lisbon
Treaty.

The EU is based on a series of treaties. These first established the European Community and the
EU, and then made amendments to those founding treaties.[79] These are power-giving treaties
which set broad policy goals and establish institutions with the necessary legal powers to
implement those goals. These legal powers include the ability to enact legislation[nb 5] which can
directly affect all member states and their inhabitants.[nb 6] The EU has legal personality, with the
right to sign agreements and international treaties.[80]

Under the principle of supremacy, national courts are required to enforce the treaties that their
member states have ratified, and thus the laws enacted under them, even if doing so requires
them to ignore conflicting national law, and (within limits) even constitutional provisions.[nb 7]
[edit] Courts of Justice

The Court of Justice in Luxembourg is the highest court in the European Union in matters of EU law.

The judicial branch of the EU—formally called the Court of Justice of the European Union—
consists of three courts: the Court of Justice, the General Court, and the European Union Civil
Service Tribunal. Together they interpret and apply the treaties and the law of the EU.[81]

The Court of Justice primarily deals with cases taken by member states, the institutions, and
cases referred to it by the courts of member states.[82] The General Court mainly deals with cases
taken by individuals and companies directly before the EU's courts,[83] and the European Union
Civil Service Tribunal adjudicates in disputes between the European Union and its civil service.
[84]
Decisions from the General Court can be appealed to the Court of Justice but only on a point
of law.[85]

[edit] Fundamental rights

Article 1 and 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union:

"Human dignity is inviolable. It must be respected and protected.
Everyone has the right to life. No one shall be condemned to death penalty, or executed."

The treaties declare that the EU itself is "founded on the values of respect for human dignity,
freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights
of persons belonging to minorities ... in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination,
tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail."[86]
In 2009 the Lisbon Treaty gave legal effect to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the
European Union. The charter is a codified catalogue of fundamental rights against which the
EU's legal acts can be judged. It consolidates many rights which were previously recognised by
the European Court of Justice and derived from the "constitutional traditions common to the
member states."[87] The European Court of Justice has long recognised fundamental rights and
has, on occasion, invalidated EU legislation based on its failure to adhere to those fundamental
rights.[88] The Charter of Fundamental Rights was drawn up in 2000. Although originally not
legally binding the Charter was frequently cited by the EU's courts as encapsulating rights which
the courts had long recognised as the fundamental principles of EU law.

EU Member States have a standardised passport design with the name of the member state, Coat of
Arms and with the words "European Union" given in their official language(s). (Ireland model)

Although signing the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is a condition for EU
membership,[nb 8] previously, the EU itself could not accede to the Convention as it is neither a
state[nb 9] nor had the competence to accede.[nb 10] The Lisbon Treaty and Protocol 14 to the ECHR
have changed this: the latter binds the EU to accede to the Convention while the former formally
permits it.

The EU also promoted human rights issues in the wider world. The EU opposes the death
penalty and has proposed its world wide abolition.[89] Abolition of the death penalty is a
condition for EU membership.[90]

[edit] Acts

The main legal acts of the EU come in three forms: regulations, directives, and decisions.
Regulations become law in all member states the moment they come into force, without the
requirement for any implementing measures,[nb 11] and automatically override conflicting
domestic provisions.[nb 5] Directives require member states to achieve a certain result while
leaving them discretion as to how to achieve the result. The details of how they are to be
implemented are left to member states.[nb 12] When the time limit for implementing directives
passes, they may, under certain conditions, have direct effect in national law against member
states.
Decisions offer an alternative to the two above modes of legislation. They are legal acts which
only apply to specified individuals, companies or a particular member state. They are most often
used in Competition Law, or on rulings on State Aid, but are also frequently used for procedural
or administrative matters within the institutions. Regulations, directives, and decisions are of
equal legal value and apply without any formal hierarchy.[91]

[edit] Justice and home affairs

Further information: Area of freedom, security and justice

The Schengen Area comprises most member states ensuring open borders.

Since the creation of the EU in 1993, it has developed its competencies in the area of justice and
home affairs, initially at an intergovernmental level and later by supranationalism. To this end,
agencies have been established that co-ordinate associated actions: Europol for co-operation of
police forces,[92] Eurojust for co-operation between prosecutors,[93] and Frontex for co-operation
between border control authorities.[94] The EU also operates the Schengen Information System[12]
which provides a common database for police and immigration authorities. This cooperation had
to particularly be developed with the advent of open borders through the Schengen Agreement
and the associated cross border crime.

Furthermore, the Union has legislated in areas such as extradition,[95] family law,[96] asylum law,
[97]
and criminal justice.[98] Prohibitions against sexual and nationality discrimination have a long
standing in the treaties.[nb 13] In more recent years, these have been supplemented by powers to
legislate against discrimination based on race, religion, disability, age, and sexual orientation.[nb
14]
By virtue of these powers, the EU has enacted legislation on sexual discrimination in the
work-place, age discrimination, and racial discrimination.[nb 15]

[edit] Foreign relations

Main articles: Foreign relations of the European Union, Common Foreign and Security Policy, and
European External Action Service
High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Catherine Ashton.

Foreign policy cooperation between member states dates from the establishment of the
Community in 1957, when member states negotiated as a bloc in international trade negotiations
under the Common Commercial Policy.[99] Steps for a more wide ranging coordination in foreign
relations began in 1970 with the establishment of European Political Cooperation which created
an informal consultation process between member states with the aim of forming common
foreign policies. It was not, however, until 1987 when European Political Cooperation was
introduced on a formal basis by the Single European Act. EPC was renamed as the Common
Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) by the Maastricht Treaty.[100]

The aims of the CFSP are to promote both the EU's own interests and those of the international
community as a whole, including the furtherance of international co-operation, respect for human
rights, democracy, and the rule of law.[101] The CFSP requires unanimity among the member
states on the appropriate policy to follow on any particular issue. The unanimity and difficult
issues treated under the CFSP makes disagreements, such as those which occurred over the war
in Iraq,[102] not uncommon.

The EU participates in all G8 and G20 summits. (G20 summit in Seoul)

Emblem of the European External Action Service.

The co-ordinator and representative of the CFSP within the EU is the High Representative of the
Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (currently Catherine Ashton) who speaks on
behalf of the EU in foreign policy and defence matters, and has the task of articulating the
positions expressed by the member states on these fields of policy into a common alignment. The
High Representative heads up the European External Action Service (EEAS), a unique EU
department[103] that has been officially implemented and operational since 1 December 2010 on
the occasion of the first anniversary of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.[104] The EEAS
will serve as a foreign ministry and diplomatic corps for the European Union.[105]

Besides the emerging international policy of the European Union, the international influence of
the EU is also felt through enlargement. The perceived benefits of becoming a member of the EU
act as an incentive for both political and economic reform in states wishing to fulfil the EU's
accession criteria, and are considered an important factor contributing to the reform of former
Communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe.[106] This influence on the internal affairs of
other countries is generally referred to as "soft power", as opposed to military "hard power".[107]

[edit] Military
Main articles: Military of the European Union, Common Security and Defence Policy, European Defence
Initiative, Synchronized Armed Forces Europe, and European Rapid Reaction Force

The Eurofighter is built by a consortium of four EU countries.

The European Union does not have one unified military. The predecessors of the European
Union were not devised as a strong military alliance because NATO was largely seen as
appropriate and sufficient for defence purposes.[108] Twenty-one EU members are members of
NATO[109] while the remaining member states follow policies of neutrality.[110] However the
compatibility of their neutrality with EU membership is questioned (including by the Prime
Minister of Finland)[111] and with mutual solidarity in the event of disasters, terrorist attacks and
armed aggression covered by TEU Article 42 (7) and TFEU Article 222 of the EU treaties; the
Western European Union, a military alliance with a mutual defence clause, was disbanded in
2010 as its role had been transferred to the EU.[112]

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the United Kingdom
spent more than €48 billion (US$69 billion) on defence in 2009, placing it third in the world after
USA and China, while France spent €47 billion (US$67.31 billion), the fourth largest. Together,
the United Kingdom and France account for 45 per cent of Europe's defence budget, 50 per cent
of its military capacity and 70 per cent of all spending in military research and development.[113]
In 2000, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, and Germany accounted for 97% of the total
military research budget of the then 15 EU member states.[114]

CSDP forces have been deployed on peacekeeping duties in parts of the Balkans and Africa.

Following the Kosovo War in 1999, the European Council agreed that "the Union must have the
capacity for autonomous action, backed by credible military forces, the means to decide to use
them, and the readiness to do so, in order to respond to international crises without prejudice to
actions by NATO". To that end, a number of efforts were made to increase the EU's military
capability, notably the Helsinki Headline Goal process. After much discussion, the most concrete
result was the EU Battlegroups initiative, each of which is planned to be able to deploy quickly
about 1500 personnel.[115]

EU forces have been deployed on peacekeeping missions from Africa to the former Yugoslavia
and the Middle East.[116] EU military operations are supported by a number of bodies, including
the European Defence Agency, satellite centre and the military staff.[117] In an EU consisting of
27 members, substantial security and defence cooperation is increasingly relying on great power
cooperation.[118]

[edit] Humanitarian aid

Further information: ECHO (European Commission)
Collectively, the EU is the largest contributor of foreign aid in the world.

The European Commissions Humanitarian Aid Office, or "ECHO", provides humanitarian aid
from the EU to developing countries. In 2006 its budget amounted to €671 million, 48% of
which went to the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries.[119] Counting the EU's own
contributions and those of its member states together, the EU is the largest aid donor in the
world.[120]

Humanitarian aid is financed directly by the budget (70%) as part of the financial instruments for
external action and also by the European Development Fund (30%)[121]. The EU's external action
financing is divided into 'geographic' instruments and 'thematic' instruments.[121] The 'geographic'
instruments provide aid through the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI, €16.9 billion,
2007-2013), which must spend 95% of its budget on overseas development assistance (ODA),
and from the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), which contains some
relevant programmes.[121] The European Development Fund (EDF, €22.7 bn, 2008-2013) is made
up of voluntary contributions by members states, but there is pressure to merge the EDF into the
budget-financed instruments in order to encourage increased contributions to match the 0.7%
target and allow the European Parliament greater oversight.[121]

The EU's aid has previously been criticised by the eurosceptic think-tank Open Europe for being
inefficient, mis-targeted and linked to economic objectives.[122] Furthermore, some charities such
as ActionAid have claimed European governments have inflated the amount they have spent on
aid by incorrectly including money spent on debt relief, foreign students, and refugees. Under the
de-inflated figures, the EU as a whole did not reach its internal aid target in 2006[123] and is
expected not to reach the international target of 0.7% of gross national income until 2015.[124]

However, four countries have reached the 0.7% target, most notably Sweden, Luxembourg, the
Netherlands and Denmark.[120] In 2005 EU aid was 0.34% of the GNP which was higher than that
of either the United States or Japan.[125] The previous commissioner for aid, Louis Michel, has
called for aid to be delivered more rapidly, to greater effect, and on humanitarian principles.[126]

[edit] Economy
Main articles: Economy of the European Union and Regional policy of the European Union
The EU and the next seven largest economies in the
world by nominal GDP (IMF, 2009).[127]

The EU has established a single market across the territory of all its members. A monetary union,
the eurozone, using a single currency comprises 17 members states.[128] In 2009 the EU generated
an estimated 28% share (US$ 16.5 trillion) of the world's nominal GDP,[129] and an estimated
21% (US$ 14.8 trillion) share of the global GDP (PPP),[18] making it the largest economy in the
world. It is the largest exporter,[130] the largest importer[131] of goods and services, and the biggest
trading partner to several large countries such as the United states, China and India.[132][133][134]

Of the top 500 largest corporations measured by revenue (Fortune Global 500 in 2010), 161 have
their headquarters in the EU.[135] In May 2007 unemployment in the EU stood at 7%[136] while
investment was at 21.4% of GDP, inflation at 2.2% and public deficit at −0.9% of GDP.[137]

EU funds finance such infrastructure projects as the Prague–Berlin motorway (D8/A17) (pictured here
near Lovosice in the Czech Republic).

There is a significant variance for annual per capita income within individual EU states, these
range from US$7,000 to US$69,000.[138] The difference between the richest and poorest regions
(271 NUTS-2 regions of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics) ranged, in 2007,
from 26% of the EU27 average in the region of Severozapaden in Bulgaria, to 334% of the
average in Inner London in the United Kingdom. On the high end, Inner London has €83,200
PPP per capita, Luxembourg €68,500, and Bruxelles-Cap €55,000, while the poorest regions, are
Severozapaden with €6,400 PPP per capita, Nord-Est and Severen tsentralen with €6,600 and
Yuzhen tsentralen with €6,800.[139]
Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds are supporting the development of underdeveloped regions
of the EU. Such regions are primarily located in the new member states of East-Central Europe.
[140]
Several funds provide emergency aid, support for candidate members to transform their
country to conform to the EU's standard (Phare, ISPA, and SAPARD), and support to the former
USSR Commonwealth of Independent States (TACIS). TACIS has now become part of the
worldwide EuropeAid programme. The EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) sponsors
research conducted by consortia from all EU members to work towards a single European
Research Area.[141]

[edit] Internal market

Main article: Internal Market (European Union)

EADS is one of 161 Fortune Global 500 companies with their headquarters in the EU. (A380 airliner from
Airbus)

Two of the original core objectives of the European Economic Community were the
development of a common market, subsequently renamed the single market, and a customs union
between its member states. The single market involves the free circulation of goods, capital,
people and services within the EU,[128] and the customs union involves the application of a
common external tariff on all goods entering the market. Once goods have been admitted into the
market they cannot be subjected to customs duties, discriminatory taxes or import quotas, as they
travel internally. The non-EU member states of Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Switzerland
participate in the single market but not in the customs union.[52] Half the trade in the EU is
covered by legislation harmonised by the EU.[142]

Free movement of capital is intended to permit movement of investments such as property

purchases and buying of shares between countries.[143] Until the drive towards Economic and
Monetary Union the development of the capital provisions had been slow. Post-Maastricht there
has been a rapidly developing corpus of ECJ judgements regarding this initially neglected
freedom. The free movement of capital is unique insofar as it is granted equally to non-member
states.

The free movement of persons means that EU citizens can move freely between member states to
live, work, study or retire in another country. This required the lowering of administrative
formalities and recognition of professional qualifications of other states.[144]
The free movement of services and of establishment allows self-employed persons to move
between member states in order to provide services on a temporary or permanent basis. While
services account for 60–70% of GDP, legislation in the area is not as developed as in other areas.
This lacuna has been addressed by the recently passed Directive on services in the internal
market which aims to liberalise the cross border provision of services.[145] According to the
Treaty the provision of services is a residual freedom that only applies if no other freedom is
being exercised.

[edit] Monetary union

See also: Euro, Maastricht criteria, Eurozone, and Economic and Monetary Union of the European Union

The eurozone (in darker blue) is constituted by 17 member states adopting the euro as legal tender.

The European Central Bank in Frankfurt governs the monetary policy.

The creation of a European single currency became an official objective of the European
Economic Community in 1969. However, it was only with the advent of the Maastricht Treaty in
1993 that member states were legally bound to start the monetary union no later than 1 January
1999. On this date the euro was duly launched by eleven of the then fifteen member states of the
EU. It remained an accounting currency until 1 January 2002, when euro notes and coins were
issued and national currencies began to phase out in the eurozone, which by then consisted of
twelve member states. The eurozone has since grown to seventeen countries, the most recent
being Estonia which joined on 1 January 2011.
All other EU member states, except Denmark and the United Kingdom, are legally bound to join
the euro[146] when the convergence criteria are met, however only a few countries have set target
dates for accession. Sweden has circumvented the requirement to join the euro by not meeting
the membership criteria.[nb 16]

The euro is designed to help build a single market by, for example: easing travel of citizens and
goods, eliminating exchange rate problems, providing price transparency, creating a single
financial market, price stability and low interest rates, and providing a currency used
internationally and protected against shocks by the large amount of internal trade within the
eurozone. It is also intended as a political symbol of integration and stimulus for more.[147] Since
its launch the euro has become the second reserve currency in the world with a quarter of foreign
exchanges reserves being in euro.[148] The euro, and the monetary policies of those who have
adopted it in agreement with the EU, are under the control of the European Central Bank (ECB).
[149]

The European Central Bank (ECB) is the central bank for the eurozone (consisting of the EU
member states which have adopted the euro), and thus controls monetary policy in that area with
an agenda to maintain price stability. It is at the centre of the European System of Central Banks,
which comprehends all EU national banks, and is guided by a board comprising of the President
of the European Central Bank, who is appointed by the European Council, and national bank
governors.[150]

[edit] Competition
Further information: European Union competition law and European Commissioner for Competition

The EU operates a competition policy intended to ensure undistorted competition within the
single market.[nb 17] The Commission as the competition regulator for the single market is
responsible for antitrust issues, approving mergers, breaking up cartels, working for economic
liberalisation and preventing state aid.[151]

The Competition Commissioner, currently Joaquín Almunia, is one of the most powerful
positions in the Commission, notable for the ability to affect the commercial interests of trans-
national corporations.[152] For example, in 2001 the Commission for the first time prevented a
merger between two companies based in the United States (GE and Honeywell) which had
already been approved by their national authority.[153] Another high profile case against
Microsoft, resulted in the Commission fining Microsoft over €777 million following nine years
of legal action.[154]

[edit] Agriculture
Main article: Common Agricultural Policy
EU farms are supported by the CAP, the largest budgetary expenditure. (Vineyard in Spain)

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is one of the oldest policies of the European
Community, and was one of its core aims.[155] The policy has the objectives of increasing
agricultural production, providing certainty in food supplies, ensuring a high quality of life for
farmers, stabilising markets, and ensuring reasonable prices for consumers.[nb 18] It was, until
recently, operated by a system of subsidies and market intervention. Until the 1990s, the policy
accounted for over 60% of the then European Community's annual budget, and still accounts for
around 35%.[155]

The policy's price controls and market interventions led to considerable overproduction, resulting
in so-called butter mountains and wine lakes. These were intervention stores of produce bought
up by the Community to maintain minimum price levels. In order to dispose of surplus stores,
they were often sold on the world market at prices considerably below Community guaranteed
prices, or farmers were offered subsidies (amounting to the difference between the Community
and world prices) to export their produce outside the Community. This system has been criticised
for under-cutting farmers outside of Europe, especially those in the developing world.[156]

The overproduction has also been criticised for encouraging environmentally unfriendly
intensive farming methods.[156] Supporters of CAP say that the economic support which it gives
to farmers provides them with a reasonable standard of living, in what would otherwise be an
economically unviable way of life. However, the EU's small farmers receive only 8% of CAP's
available subsidies.[156]

Since the beginning of the 1990s, the CAP has been subject to a series of reforms. Initially these
reforms included the introduction of set-aside in 1988, where a proportion of farm land was
deliberately withdrawn from production, milk quotas (by the McSharry reforms in 1992) and,
more recently, the 'de-coupling' (or disassociation) of the money farmers receive from the EU
and the amount they produce (by the Fischler reforms in 2004). Agriculture expenditure will
move away from subsidy payments linked to specific produce, toward direct payments based on
farm size. This is intended to allow the market to dictate production levels, while maintaining
agricultural income levels.[155] One of these reforms entailed the abolition of the EU's sugar
regime, which previously divided the sugar market between member states and certain African-
Caribbean nations with a privileged relationship with the EU.[157]
[edit] Energy
Main article: Energy policy of the European Union

EU energy production

46% of total EU primary energy use

Nuclear energy[nb 19] 29.3%

Coal & lignite 21.9%

Gas 19.4%

Renewable energy 14.6%

Oil 13.4%

Other 1.4%

Net imports of energy

54% of total primary EU energy use

Oil & petroleum products 60.2%

Gas 26.4%

Other 13.4%

In 2006, the 27 member states of the EU had a gross inland energy consumption of 1,825 million
tonnes of oil equivalent (toe).[158] Around 46% of the energy consumed was produced within the
member states while 54% was imported.[158] In these statistics, nuclear energy is treated as
primary energy produced in the EU, regardless of the source of the uranium, of which less than
3% is produced in the EU.[159]

The EU has had legislative power in the area of energy policy for most of its existence; this has
its roots in the original European Coal and Steel Community. The introduction of a mandatory
and comprehensive European energy policy was approved at the meeting of the European
Council in October 2005, and the first draft policy was published in January 2007.[160]

The EU currently imports 82% of its oil, 57% of its gas[161] and 97.48% of its uranium[159]
demands. There are concerns that Europe's dependence on Russian energy is endangering the
Union and its member countries. The EU is attempting to diversify its energy supply.[162]

[edit] Infrastructure
Further information: European Commissioner for Transport and European Commissioner for Industry
and Entrepreneurship
The Öresund Bridge between Denmark and Sweden is part of the Trans-European Networks.

The EU is working to improve cross-border infrastructure within the EU, for example through
the Trans-European Networks (TEN). Projects under TEN include the Channel Tunnel, LGV
Est, the Fréjus Rail Tunnel, the Öresund Bridge, the Brenner Base Tunnel and the Strait of
Messina Bridge. In 2001 it was estimated that by 2010 the network would cover:
75,200 kilometres (46,700 mi) of roads; 78,000 kilometres (48,000 mi) of railways; 330 airports;
270 maritime harbours; and 210 internal harbours.[163][164]

The developing European transport policies will increase the pressure on the environment in
many regions by the increased transport network. In the pre-2004 EU members, the major
problem in transport deals with congestion and pollution. After the recent enlargement, the new
states that joined since 2004 added the problem of solving accessibility to the transport agenda.
[165]
The Polish road network in particular was in poor condition: at Poland's accession to the EU,
4,600 roads needed to be upgraded to EU standards, demanding approximately €17 billion.[166]

The Galileo positioning system is another EU infrastructure project . Galileo is a proposed

Global Navigation Satellite System, to be built by the EU and launched by the European Space
Agency (ESA), and is to be operational by 2010. The Galileo project was launched partly to
reduce the EU's dependency on the US-operated Global Positioning System, but also to give
more complete global coverage and allow for far greater accuracy, given the aged nature of the
GPS system.[167] It has been criticised by some due to costs, delays, and their perception of
redundancy given the existence of the GPS system.[168]

[edit] Education and science

Main articles: Educational policies and initiatives of the European Union and Framework Programmes
for Research and Technological Development
Erasmus students from five countries in the Netherlands.

Renewable energy is one priority in transnational research activities such as the FP7.

Education and science are areas where the EU's role is limited to supporting national
governments. In education, the policy was mainly developed in the 1980s in programmes
supporting exchanges and mobility. The most visible of these has been the Erasmus Programme,
a university exchange programme which began in 1987. In its first 20 years it has supported
international exchange opportunities for well over 1.5 million university and college students and
has become a symbol of European student life.[169]

There are now similar programmes for school pupils and teachers, for trainees in vocational
education and training, and for adult learners in the Lifelong Learning Programme 2007–2013.
These programmes are designed to encourage a wider knowledge of other countries and to
spread good practices in the education and training fields across the EU.[170] Through its support
of the Bologna process the EU is supporting comparable standards and compatible degrees
across Europe.

Scientific development is facilitated through the EU's Framework Programmes, the first of which
started in 1984. The aims of EU policy in this area are to co-ordinate and stimulate research. The
independent European Research Council allocates EU funds to European or national research
projects.[171] The Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) deals in a number of areas, for example
energy where it aims to develop a diverse mix of renewable energy for the environment and to
reduce dependence on imported fuels.[172]

[edit] Demographics
Main article: Demographics of the European Union
The combined population of all 27 member states has been forecast in October, 23rd 2010 at
501,064,211 as of 1 January 2010.[5] The EU's population is 7.3% of the world total, yet the EU
covers just 3% of the Earth's land, amounting to a population density of 115,9 per km² (300,1 per
sq mi) making the EU one of the most densely populated regions of the world.

[edit] Urbanization
Population of the 5 largest cities in the EU[173]

Density Density Urban area

City limits LUZ
City /km² /sq mi (2005)
(2006) (2004)

London 7,512,400 4,761 12,330 9,332,000 11,917,000

Berlin 3,410,000 3,815 9,880 3,761,000 4,971,331

Madrid 3,228,359 5,198 13,460 4,990,000 5,804,829

Paris 2,153,600 24,672 63,900 9,928,000 11,089,124

Rome 2,708,395 2,105 5,450 2,867,000 3,457,690

The EU is home to more global cities than any other region in the world.[174] It contains 16 cities
with populations of over one million, the largest being London.

Besides many large cities, the EU also includes several densely populated regions that have no
single core but have emerged from the connection of several cites and now encompass large
metropolitan areas. The largest are Rhine-Ruhr having approximately 11.5 million inhabitants
(Cologne, Dortmund, Düsseldorf et al.), Randstad approx. 7 million (Amsterdam, Rotterdam,
The Hague, Utrecht et al.), Frankfurt/Rhine-Main approx. 5.8 million (Frankfurt, Wiesbaden et
al.), the Flemish diamond approx. 5.5 million (urban area in between Antwerp, Brussels, Leuven
and Ghent), the Öresund Region approx. 3.7 million (Copenhagen, Denmark and Malmö,
Sweden), and the Upper Silesian Industrial Region approx. 3.5 million (Katowice, Sosnowiec et
al.)[175]

[edit] Languages
Main article: Languages of the European Union

European official languages report (EU-251)

Native
Language Total
Speakers

English 13% 51%

 German 18% 32%

French 12% 26%

Italian 13% 16%

Spanish 9% 15%

Polish 9% 10%

Dutch 5% 6%

Greek 3% 3%

Czech 2% 3%

Swedish 2% 3%

Hungarian 2% 2%

Portuguese 2% 2%

Slovak 1% 2%

Danish 1% 1%

Finnish 1% 1%

Lithuanian 1% 1%

Slovenian 1% 1%

Estonian <1% <1%

Irish/Gaelic <1% <1%

Latvian <1% <1%

Maltese <1% <1%

1
Published in 2006, before the
accession of Bulgaria and Romania.
Native: Native language[176]
Total: EU citizens able to hold a
conversation in this language[177]

Among the many languages and dialects used in the EU, it has 23 official and working
languages: Bulgarian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek,
Hungarian, Italian, Irish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovak,
Slovene, Spanish, and Swedish.[178][179] Important documents, such as legislation, are translated
into every official language. The European Parliament provides translation into all languages for
documents and its plenary sessions.[180] Some institutions use only a handful of languages as
internal working languages.[181] Language policy is the responsibility of member states, but EU
institutions promote the learning of other languages.[nb 20][182]

German is the most widely spoken mother tongue (about 88.7 million people as of 2006),
followed by English, Italian, and French. English is by far the most spoken foreign language and
is spoken in over half (51%) of the EU population (including native English speakers), with
German and French following. 56% of EU citizens are able to engage in a conversation in a
language other than their mother tongue.[183] Most official languages of the EU belong to the
Indo-European language family, except Estonian, Finnish, and Hungarian, which belong to the
Uralic language family, and Maltese, which is an Afroasiatic language. Most EU official
languages are written in the Latin alphabet except Bulgarian, written in Cyrillic, and Greek,
written in the Greek alphabet.[184]

Besides the 23 official languages, there are about 150 regional and minority languages, spoken
by up to 50 million people.[184] Of these, only the Spanish regional languages (i.e.,
Catalan/Valencian, Galician, and the non-Indo-European Basque), Scottish Gaelic, and Welsh[185]
can be used by citizens in communication with the main European institutions.[186] Although EU
programmes can support regional and minority languages, the protection of linguistic rights is a
matter for the individual member states. The European Charter for Regional or Minority
Languages ratified by most EU states provides general guidelines that states can follow to protect
their linguistic heritage.

[edit] Religion
Main article: Religion in the European Union

The EU is a secular body with no formal connection with any religion, but Article 17 of the
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognises the "status under national law of
churches and religious associations" as well as that of "philosophical and non-confessional
organisations".[187]

The percentage of Europeans in each member state who believe in "a God" [188]
The preamble to the Treaty on European Union mentions the "cultural, religious and humanist
inheritance of Europe".[187] Discussion over the draft texts of the European Constitution and later
the Treaty of Lisbon included proposals to mention Christianity or "God" or both, in the
preamble of the text, but the idea faced opposition and was dropped.[189]

Christians in the EU are divided among followers of Roman Catholicism, numerous Protestant
denominations (especially in northern Europe), and Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic (in
south eastern Europe). Other religions, such as Islam and Judaism, are also represented in the EU
population. As of 2009, the EU had an estimated Muslim population of 13 million,[190] and an
estimated Jewish population of over a million.[191]

Eurostat's Eurobarometer opinion polls showed in 2005 that 52% of EU citizens believed in a
god, 27% in "some sort of spirit or life force", and 18% had no form of belief.[188] Many countries
have experienced falling church attendance and membership in recent years.[192] The countries
where the fewest people reported a religious belief were Estonia (16%) and the Czech Republic
(19%).[188] The most religious countries are Malta (95%; predominantly Roman Catholic), and
Cyprus and Romania both with about 90% of the citizens believing in God (both predominantly
Eastern Orthodox). Across the EU, belief was higher among women, increased with age, those
with religious upbringing, those who left school at 15 with a basic education, and those
"positioning themselves on the right of the political scale (57%)."[188]

[edit] Culture
Main articles: Cultural policies of the European Union and Sport policies of the European Union

Turku in Finland (left) and Tallinn in Estonia (right) are the European Capitals of Culture in 2011

Cultural co-operation between member states has been a concern of the EU since its inclusion as
a community competency in the Maastricht Treaty.[193] Actions taken in the cultural area by the
EU include the Culture 2000 7-year programme,[193] the European Cultural Month event,[194] the
Media Plus programme,[195] orchestras such as the European Union Youth Orchestra[196] and the
European Capital of Culture programme – where one or more cities in the EU are selected for
one year to assist the cultural development of that city.[197]

Sport is mainly the responsibility of an individual member states or other international

organisations rather than that of the EU. However, there are some EU policies that have had an
impact on sport, such as the free movement of workers which was at the core of the Bosman
ruling, which prohibited national football leagues from imposing quotas on foreign players with
European citizenship.[198] Under the Treaty of Lisbon sports were given a special status which
exempted this sector from many of the EU's economic rules.[citation needed] This followed lobbying by
governing organisations such as the International Olympic Committee and FIFA, due to
objections over the applications of free market principles to sport which led to an increasing gap
between rich and poor clubs.[199]

[edit] See also

Book:European Union

Books are collections of articles that can be downloaded or ordered in print.

European Union portal

 European Free Trade Association (EFTA)

 European NAvigator (EU history)
 Outline of the European Union
 Potential superpower