Dr. Ali Ettefagh serves as a director of Highmore Global Corporation, an investment company in emerging markets of Eastern Europe, CIS, and the Middle East. He is the co-author of several books on trade conflict, resolution of international trade disputes, conflicts in letters of credit, trade-related banking transactions, sovereign debt, arbitration and dispute resolutions and publications specific to the oil and gas, communication, aviation and finance sectors. Dr. Ettefagh is a member of the executive committee and the board of directors of The Development Foundation, an advisor to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, and an advisor to a number of European companies. Dr. Ettefagh speaks Persian (Farsi), English, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Arabic and Turkish.
Close.
Ali Ettefagh
Tehran, Iran
Dr. Ali Ettefagh serves as a director of Highmore Global Corporation, an investment company in emerging markets of Eastern Europe, CIS, and the Middle East.
more »
So... does anyone else think we need to see a complete replacement of the UN? Part of the problem, in my opinion, is that UN needs to be more representative. China and India, with vast populations, should have vastly more voting power than tiny "countries" like Nauru with its 50,000 inhabitants. Countries that contribute more to paying the UN's expenses should also have more influence than countries that pay less.
The original UN structure has 2 levels of power, the security council and the general assembly. This structure was developed because the UN needed to recognize the reality that all power rests ultimately on military power. So the dominant military powers of the day got seats on the security council. And in order to pretend that all nations were equally sovereign, every country got one vote in the general assembly, no matter how insignificant their "country" happened to be.
Times have changed. New powers have arisen. Membership in the security council needs to be expanded. Tiny insignificant countries should be removed from the general assembly or have their voting influence greatly reduced. The government of India should have vastly more influence in UN decision-making than tiny and insignificant Nauru. That's the root of the problem with the UN - it's governing structure is too far removed from the realities of global power. It makes decisions that a disconnected from reality. The distorted decision-making structure of the organization requires it.
It is indeed time to go back to basics in all matters, from energy consumption, to financial markets to international relations and revise and modernise.
PostGlobal is an interactive conversation on global issues moderated by Newsweek International Editor Fareed Zakaria and David Ignatius of The Washington Post. It is produced jointly by Newsweek and washingtonpost.com, as is On Faith, a conversation on religion. Please send your comments, questions and suggestions for PostGlobal to Lauren Keane, its editor and producer.
All Comments (4)
So... does anyone else think we need to see a complete replacement of the UN? Part of the problem, in my opinion, is that UN needs to be more representative. China and India, with vast populations, should have vastly more voting power than tiny "countries" like Nauru with its 50,000 inhabitants. Countries that contribute more to paying the UN's expenses should also have more influence than countries that pay less.
The original UN structure has 2 levels of power, the security council and the general assembly. This structure was developed because the UN needed to recognize the reality that all power rests ultimately on military power. So the dominant military powers of the day got seats on the security council. And in order to pretend that all nations were equally sovereign, every country got one vote in the general assembly, no matter how insignificant their "country" happened to be.
Times have changed. New powers have arisen. Membership in the security council needs to be expanded. Tiny insignificant countries should be removed from the general assembly or have their voting influence greatly reduced. The government of India should have vastly more influence in UN decision-making than tiny and insignificant Nauru. That's the root of the problem with the UN - it's governing structure is too far removed from the realities of global power. It makes decisions that a disconnected from reality. The distorted decision-making structure of the organization requires it.
June 16, 2008 9:57 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 16, 2008 09:57
It is indeed time to go back to basics in all matters, from energy consumption, to financial markets to international relations and revise and modernise.
June 12, 2008 5:16 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2008 05:16
The shiites use to much taqqiye. one wouldn't really know what they really want?!!!
June 12, 2008 4:54 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 12, 2008 04:54
And how ironic those words are in their mother tonge.
June 11, 2008 6:40 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on June 11, 2008 18:40