As a result of the CWC rules, less than a third of the total membership has dismissed the unanimously elected Director-General. The legality of this decision is highly questionable but there is slight possibility that Member-States will challenge the minority dismissal. Few have the audacity to oppose the United States.
(Please see the two articles from The Markland Group.)
The first irony of the whole matter is, that the United States was one of the nations that unanimously re-elected Jose Bustani in 2000, one year before his first term as Director-General had expired. It was expected that policy continuity would continue through 2005.
The second irony is that U.S. President George W. Bush, who was not chosen by the American Electorate, but was instead virtually appointed by the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5 to 4 vote, in January 2001, has now been able to dismiss the unanimously elected Director-General of an independent organisation.
This “achievement” lies not with the United States, however, nor with the 47 other Member-States that agreed to dismiss Mr. Bustani - if they truly believe that he was suddenly no longer qualified for the job.
The failure and shame of the decision is that 90 Member-States did not have the courage to take a position, either way, thereby surrendering their right to vote and allowing less than a third of the organisational membership to make the decision for them.
Democracies fail only when the electorate is either too cowardly or too apathetic to make a decision. We can only applaud Mr. Bustani’s courage and shake our heads in consternation at the moral torpor of those who let him fall.
We also hope that someone will be able to induce Iraq, Libya, North Korea and others who have yet to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention or Israel and others who have yet to ratify it, to reconsider their position and agree to abide by the Chemical Weapons Convention. The fact that the OPCW no longer appears to be an independent organisation will make it all the more difficult.
By Paul V. Rafferty
Please also see the other articles in this section.
The actual votes in the Special Session are as follows:
(Please see the two articles from The Markland Group.)
The first irony of the whole matter is, that the United States was one of the nations that unanimously re-elected Jose Bustani in 2000, one year before his first term as Director-General had expired. It was expected that policy continuity would continue through 2005.
The second irony is that U.S. President George W. Bush, who was not chosen by the American Electorate, but was instead virtually appointed by the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5 to 4 vote, in January 2001, has now been able to dismiss the unanimously elected Director-General of an independent organisation.
This “achievement” lies not with the United States, however, nor with the 47 other Member-States that agreed to dismiss Mr. Bustani - if they truly believe that he was suddenly no longer qualified for the job.
The failure and shame of the decision is that 90 Member-States did not have the courage to take a position, either way, thereby surrendering their right to vote and allowing less than a third of the organisational membership to make the decision for them.
Democracies fail only when the electorate is either too cowardly or too apathetic to make a decision. We can only applaud Mr. Bustani’s courage and shake our heads in consternation at the moral torpor of those who let him fall.
We also hope that someone will be able to induce Iraq, Libya, North Korea and others who have yet to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention or Israel and others who have yet to ratify it, to reconsider their position and agree to abide by the Chemical Weapons Convention. The fact that the OPCW no longer appears to be an independent organisation will make it all the more difficult.
By Paul V. Rafferty
Please also see the other articles in this section.
The actual votes in the Special Session are as follows: