One to keep an eye on: Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is retiring in november after twelve years at the helm. Under a voting system that could easily lead to deadlock, or at least to intense horse-trading, the agency's 35-nation board of governors at its headquarters in Vienna began a first ballot on Thursday to choose between Yukiya Amano, 62, a Japanese official who is his country’s ambassador to the organization, and his South African counterpart, Abdul Samad Minty. The winner needs a two-thirds majority to prevail. News reports said that, in the first round, Mr. Amano secured 21 votes compared to 14 for Mr. Minty. A majority would be 24 votes. Both candidates are experienced diplomats and negotiators. The choice of candidates reflect a division in the I.A.E.A. between those western and industrialized nations that lead the nuclear club and see the atomic agency's prime role as a watchdog, and developing countries more interested in the broader use of nuclear energy. (Cowell) To a certain degree the candidates apparently represent something of the split between wealthy (Amano) and developing (Minty) nations. Nor are these candidates sure things. If a winner is not decided by Friday, the whole process might have to start over. We'll see what comes. ____________________ Notes: Cowell, Alan. "Atomic Agency to Choose New Head". New York Times. March 26, 2009. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/world/27nuke.html
So he isn't going to stick around to see what happens when the LHC starts up next time?:shrug: He must know the results won't be promising so he is jumping ship early.
Yukiya Amano will be next head of IAEA. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! and Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! We know who he sides with Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The Japanese guy should be the new head. As the only people who suffered nuclear bombing it would make a Japanese appointment a more powerful symbol. The west will not trust anyone who has a bone to pick with it. The developing nations are still pissed off at colonialism and slavery and feel like a nuke will make them as powerful as the industrialized world. And the Arab/Muslim world, in addition to the above, has the "Glory of Islam" to think about. That is why Mohammad al-Baradei was not trusted by anyone in the west, and why a head from either of the above 2 groups (poor or Arab/Muslim) would not be useful. Al-Baradei has been a complete and utter failure at his job. Under his watch North Korea, Iran, Syria and Lybia have advanced their nuclear programs without anyone (well, the IAEA) noticing or stopping them. It took unilateral action and bargaining by the US and UK to stop Lybia, and a spying and military action by Israel to first find out, and then stop Syria. If the UN appoints another al-Baradei, faith and trust in the UN will be weakened even further as an institution and will prompt the west to act even more unilaterally.
Or perhaps just nukes for the Muslim terrorists. They'll use them on all the innocent Muslims of the world as they've used all their other weapons ...killing Muslims is what they do best. And other Muslims seem to defend them for doing it. Baron Max
Or perhaps the nukes just for Israeli oppressors and terrorists to use on the people they deem are living on their land.
And internationally recognized nation of the world can't be a terrorist. And besides, Israel has had nukes for ages and have never used them on anyone. Nope, we should give nukes to the Muslim terrorists ...they'd begin blowing up their own people all over the place ...mostly in the name of Allah! Baron Max
unless they are called iran, iraq (under saddam) Syria, libya, (before the colonel became our mate) etc etc
It's actually states or nations that support terrorism. Iran is not a terrorist nation ...it's just a nation full to the gills with terrorists, yet it's a recognized nation of the world. A nation can't be a terrorist ...but they CAN support terrorism. Big difference. Baron Max
Actually, no Muslim country has ever advocated using nuclear weapons to kill. Eve the highest scholars in Iran denounce nuclear weapons. It is not allowed for Muslims to burn other people. The only nations whose commentators advocate nuclear war are the nation that has already used 2 and the otehr nation that has 100s of them
Maybe next year, maybe no go No Go Five rounds, no winner Well, if that didn't just go brilliantly. The story so far: International Atomic Energy Agency governors failed to agree on a successor to Director General Mohamed ElBaradei on Friday after five rounds of voting, opening the field to new candidates who might bridge divisions of rich and poor. The IAEA, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, was hoping to avoid a long delay in installing a new chief as it confronts mounting challenges, including Iran's disputed pursuit of nuclear technology that could yield atomic bombs and a shortage of money needed to uphold its anti-proliferation mandate. Yukiya Amano, Japan's envoy to the IAEA, was the favorite but fell a vote short of the two-thirds majority required in the final vote by the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors. Voting was split largely along rich- and poor-nation lines. Industrialized states backed Amano, developing states South Africa's Abdul Samad Minty. (Washington Post) I know, I know. Not much to go on. ____________________ Notes: "Around the World". Washington Post. March 28, 2009; page A14. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/AR2009032703217.html
Yeah, well, Islam's highest scholars also say that Muslims aren't supposed to kill other Muslims, yet they do it everyday somewhere in the world. Doesn't lend much credibility for what Islam's highest scholars say, does it? Baron Max