I am sorry but I will only comment on candidates I am aware of, in this case those from India and Jordan. I have heard the Indian candidate interviewed. He was impressive. Unfortunately, I have never heard the Jordanian representative but I am aware of what he represents.

India offers the world an eloquent speaker who knows the UN system inside out. And India is an up-and-coming Asian powerhouse. Jordan offers the world a person who is familiar with the conflict in the Middle East and is a representative of Arab moderation and reform.

While the UN record on the Middle East has been bad and looks likely to remain so (the list of unfulfilled UN resolutions on Palestine is long), if the international community is serious about solving the Palestinian conflict then it should vote for the Jordanian candidate. Judging from the UN's record, it seems unlikely that a Jordanian official -- even a Hashemite prince - can do much, but it might be worth giving this seemingly intractable problem a chance to find a permanent solution.

On the other hand, if the position of the UN General Secretary functions as little more than a representative of the world conscience, then the smooth-tailing, experienced Indian candidate will probably prove most successful.