As secretary-General of the United Nations, do you think Mr Annan is doing a good Job for Africa. I watch Fox New channel all the time and Mr Annan seems to get very bad reviews from American politicians. I used to think he was just underestimated because he's African, and Americans always think the better than the rest of the world.

But come to think of it, thousands died from the civil war in Rwanda, Uganda and many more, how fast did United Nations act. Hundreds are still dieing in Africa as we speak and what's the UN doing about it.

So my point is this, do you think Mr Annan is doing a good job for his people or do you think he's just out there kissing up to the white man and jump when the tell him to jump.

Annan is a sorry ass cock sucking slowpoke (dont mind my language)! he is so full of Arab oil money that he cannot differentiate it from french orange juice. See how he is running around like a slowpoke since isreal started dealing with Hezbollah but doesnt give a sh**t about the rapes in congo or the genocide in Sudan. left for me I will rate him -1%

You hit the nail on the head Emeka, it's like the UN don't give a rat's ass about what's going on in Africa. And the secretary general of the UN is African. Very pathetic if you ask me. I give Kofi a ZERO.

As the UN Secretary-general, Kofi Annan is supposed to be impartial.

You maybe right Seun but i still think there's just a lot more the UN could be doing for Africa.

So far Kofi Annan is the best Secretary-General of the UN. I went on a course trip to US and UN building part of where we went, the talk and the view of everything in general makes me conclude he is the best so far.

The fact that he is the secretary general of UN does not mean the whole load of job should be his, he will need assistant from every individual especially those in power in every country. The question is, is he being giving the support and assistant? The job i the world is not the duty of one person.

The whole world cannot accept one person, there will always be an opposition.

Damest09:

So far Kofi Annan is the best Secretary-General of the UN.

I don't think so. I wouldn't say he was the worst but he's definitely not the best. Its a shame that he could not use his position to do a lot more for Africa (especially in Sudan (Darfur), Somalia and Congo).
By the time his term ends next year i doubt if there'll be anything worthwhile to remember about his time at the UN apart from the Oil for food scandal

Does the UN exist? Is it relevant in this era? The UN is no more than a lameduck set up by the US and its alies to reign in the communists after the two world wars. It was not set up with Africa in mind and never will be. Even the so-called Western powers routinely disregard the UN whenever they like and they use the UN as a trump card when it comes to nations like North Korea and Iran.

That guy isnt relevant to me, He is just a robot being controled by the US, what they tell him to do he does it i would give him 2 out of 10 for his job, he should stick up 4 himself.

Badman888:

That guy isnt relevant to me, He is just a robot being controled by the US, what they tell him to do he does it i would give him 2 out of 10 for his job, he should stick up 4 himself.

How can he stick up for himself when the UN headquaters is in the US, more than half of UN bills are paid by the US. More like what Nigeria should be doing, dictating to the AU and not sitting down there listening to the likes of Guinea, Gambia and Sierraleone!

I would give him a 1 out of 10. He's close to useless.

What do you expect him to do for africa having spent most of his life in US?

he is just a useless man, he is not respected and he has made no impact whatsoever other than scandals of course

i believe d guy has handled a delicate post as good as he possibly can. its nt a kettle of fish u knw, he has stood out as a lone voice of reason in a world filled with war mongers ably led by a bush administration in d u.s. i believe he shd be given credit based on d fact dat he has tried in africa e.g. somalia relief effort(though slow at first) he did his best in niger(during d farmine) he was part of d mediation in zimbabwe,he played a major role in cote de voire(though dat issue hasnt been resolved yet). bear it in mind also dat his jurisdiction is not solely africa but d whole world and as such he must be seen to be d impartial arbiter in united nations activities world-wide

What ever happened to his son Gojo (I hope I got the name right) and the oil for food sandal that was all over the news last year.

i believe d guy has handled a delicate post as good as he possibly can. its nt a kettle of fish u knw, he has stood out as a lone voice of reason in a world filled with war mongers ably led by a bush administration in d u.s. i believe he should be given credit based on d fact that he has tried in africa e.g. somalia relief effort(though slow at first) he did his best in niger(during d farmine) he was part of d mediation in zimbabwe,he played a major role in cote de voire(though that issue hasnt been resolved yet). bear it in mind also that his jurisdiction is not solely africa but d whole world and as such he must be seen to be d impartial arbiter in united nations activities world-wide

I agree with you completely. I will award Kofi Annan 8 out of 10. It is sad that we Africans are criticizing Annan here, it is UN that is rubbish not him. I personally think that UN should be abolished period.

when the US has veto power and such a huge influence on the UN what the hell do you expect him to do. Every resolution they pass against Israel and the US is vetoed down, Kofi Annan is a lion whose legs have been cuttoff, he can growl and roar all he wants but lacks the mobility to do anything.

Does it even matter what rating Kofi gets? The U.N. is nothing more than lasting legacy for the allies. Heck, even the French, that got steamrolled in WW2 get a veto.

The real question is whether Nigeria should be a part of this madness. The U.N., quick to pass resolutions condemning third world countries but stands powerless to hold the 5 permanent members and first world countries accountable.

Nigeria should pull out of the U.N. Let the French, British, Americans, Russians and Communist Chinese bask in their post-world war 2 glory. In fact, come to think about it, how did China get a permanent sit? 

The guy is unfortunately caught b/w a rock and a hard place. He is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. He is just the figurehead of an organization that is waiting for someone bold enough to call for its demise. The US set a precedent prior to attacking Iraq. Now Israel is doing the same thing (not to say it shouldn't defend itself, but that is another matter ). Now, no African nation can claim that an African has never been a UN chief.

So as far as his performance? i would say he isn't performing. That is if you want to exclude all the scandals that have occurred while he has been in power, Oil for food for one.

Thatz how I see it anyways.

I believe there's so many problems plaguing Africa that most of his achievements seem minuscule when taken as whole. Having said this, though, I still believe he could have done more for Africa.

Davidylan and a couple of other guys have said it all. Forget that the organization is called United Nations.  There is nothing united in the way the business of the organization is conducted when only few powerful countries calls the shot.  Don't forget that the UN was a creation of the US and the US is the principal contributor to its funds.  So Washington always expect that the UN will take cue from her.  Much like he who plays the pipper dictates the tune.

Why was Boutros Ghali, Kofi Annan's predecessor in office removed?  He wants to show the US that he was the secretary-general, but the US was not going to allow that, so he was not allowed to run for his second term.

The US congress and the government officials are always critical of the UN and they loathe the person of Kofi Annan, especially on ocassions when the UN want to appear to be somewhat independent or when it criticizes the actions of the US.  What an affront? The reasoning is that the UN cannot bite the fingers that feeds it.  The fact is the secretary-general cannot assert any authority over the actions of the powerful members. How many times have the US congress threatened to withhold its contributions to the UN? Many times, the last been the series of discussion leading to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.  What was the offence of the UN and its secretary -general? For daring to question the authority of the almighty US for deciding on the pre-emptive military expedition in Iraq.   

So if your source of news is Fox News, the right wing radio talk shows, you will always be exposed to the viewpoints of those highly biased officials of the Bush Administrations pouring venom on Kofi and the UN.  I think the US is only interested in a puppet as the secretary-general which can be kicked around like football.  Its desire is to merely use the UN as a rubber stamp for all its actions without objection.

Why the new wave of criticism of the UN and Kofi Annan? Because he was eloquent enough to call for a ceasefire of hostilities between Israel and Hisbollah when the "paymaster" is interested in elogating the fight.  Bottom line the SG is not allowed and cannot hold any contrary opinion from the US, even though it was made on humanitarian grounds to save the lives of civilians and the children that are being killed without regard to Geneva conventions.

Considering the impediments that confronts the SG in the discharge of his functions, I think he has performed above average, but there is always room for improvement afterall he is human.

about d oil for food scandal remeber dat d independent panel of enquiry did nt find d man guilty of any wrongdoing, ohhhh!!! even though there report criticised some ways d u.n. bureaucracy functions but dere was no direct indictment on annan. in as much as d u.s. holds a lot of d aces in d u.n. have it in mind dat dere r still checks and balances as can be seen in d pre-iraq war where only d u.s. n u.k stood for an invasion while d rest favoured dialogue. d action in iraq has further shown d need for dis u.n. because after all said and done,d u.s. still came back seeking a concerted effort for relief n peace-keeping. d need for d u.n. is unquestionable but d enphasis shd be a dilution of regional powers who carry a veto veto vote on d security council and also a reorganisation of d arms of d u.n. to meet d current trends of efficiency,integrity and decisive action.nigeria stands to gain from being a member of d union so i will still maintain dat she stays wit it. annan has tried a lot for africa even though as i said b4 there are places u would expect more but hey!!! d guy is human and he is d sec.gen of d u.n. nt only africa. hes leadership style was positively felt during d tsunami in asia n he is still calling for investigations into d guantanamo bay prisoners of conscience issue. he is his own man and shd be celebrated to an extent by his immediate constituency(africa). even though boutrous ghali was fighting for autonomy wat at d end of d day was his legacy as sec.gen?

He he,

I would have loved to add more, but the last 2 comments are not divided into paragraphs. Call me lazy or mentally retarded, but after the first 5 lines or so, everything seemed like a blur. Modify ur posts and I may b game. Otherwise, I might feel obligated to remove my notification from this post that has the potential of being very controversial, if not already

@my2cents sorry 4 d jumbling up (its nt really in my nature)hope dis helps ur reading pleasure

about d oil for food scandal remeber that d independent panel of enquiry did nt find d man guilty of any wrongdoing, ohhhh!!! even though there report criticised some ways d u.n. bureaucracy functions but dere was no direct indictment on annan.

in as much as d u.s. holds a lot of d aces in d u.n. have it in mind that dere r still checks and balances as can be seen in d pre-iraq war where only d u.s. n u.k stood for an invasion while d rest favoured dialogue. d action in iraq has further shown d need for this u.n. because after all said and done,d u.s. still came back seeking a concerted effort for relief n peace-keeping.

d need for d u.n. is unquestionable but d enphasis should be a dilution of regional powers who carry a veto veto vote on d security council and also a reorganisation of d arms of d u.n. to meet d current trends of efficiency,integrity and decisive action.nigeria stands to gain from being a member of d union so i will still maintain that she stays wit it.

annan has tried a lot for africa even though as i said before there are places u would expect more but hey!!! d guy is human and he is d sec.gen of d u.n. nt only africa. hes leadership style was positively felt during d tsunami in asia n he is still calling for investigations into d guantanamo bay prisoners of conscience issue. he is his own man and should be celebrated to an extent by his immediate constituency(africa).

even though boutrous ghali was fighting for autonomy what at d end of d day was his legacy as sec.gen?

buchio7, thanks for modifying ur post :

We may be saying the same thing but in different ways. That is y i started my post by saying that Annan is caught b/w a rock and a hard place. Of course the major contributor to the UN is america and as they say, u r to play your tune according to who pays the piper. If things dont go the way of the US, they immediately dig into ur past and bring up something that cd hurt your reputation. My take on the oil-for-food program is that it happened. Letz face it, we are all human. Who, even for white house, no dey chop money? Annan may not be involved directly, but he knows whoz hands are. I blv his son was incriminated somewhat?

Bottomline, his job is worthless, especially in light of recent precedents. Left for me, I would scrap the organization. It served its purpose after WW2. Like the League of Nations though, it needs to be re-organized.

@my2cents.
u r saying 2 tins. is it dat u want it scrapped or re-organised? i would choose to believe dat u meant d latter because d u.n. is still needed in world affairs. take for instance dere programs in nigeria. dey have touched d lives of so many through agencies such as undp,w.h.o e.t.c even partnering with local n.g.os to help in capacity building in northern areas of nigeria for skill development,education e.t.c i still believe dere is a lot of good d u.n. is doing if u look at dere activities on ground.

yeah,

I meant re-organized. Sorry. If it means giving it another name in the process, so be it.

Take a look at what is happening in Somalia. That country is on it's way to becoming what Afghanistan was like under the Taliban. The Government has repeatedly called for UN intervention. Yet no action has been taken.

Mariory:

and y hasnt anything been done? Cos the US has no national interest in the region. Besides, isnt that where Clinton had sent in some soldiers some yrs ago, only to "cut and run"? Besides, does that country produce oil or do any of its citizens have white skin? U shd know the drill about when oyibo helps "Africa".

sad, but true.

yes u can mention places dat have nt been resolved by d u.n or dat dey have failed to act but dont 4get to name places where dey have acted e.g. niger republic,indonesia e.t.c agreed dere r places dey shd have acted more decisively but dont let us throw d baby away wit d bath water.

it is called united nations not selected nations, that organization is run by the so called first world and they use it to protect their intersets like always, unfortunately we africans are always on the loosing end.