Minister of Culture Farouk Hosni's campaign to head UNESCO resembles a comedy of errors, writes Ayman El-Amir* Egyptian Minister of Culture Farouk Hosni has lost his bid for the post of secretary-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) and he and his small circle of supporters are outraged. After all, he came within three votes of the number he needed from the all-powerful 58-member Executive Board to be elected to the post. He would have served for two five-year consecutive terms. Hosni is 71 years old now; he would have turned 81 by the time he completed his second term. The Egyptian minister emerged from the experience an embittered man. In public statements and interviews he lashed out at the US permanent representative to UNESCO, Ambassador David Killion, the Obama administration, Israel, the Zionist-Jewish lobby, renegade African countries and the ambassador of one Arab country that allegedly lobbied against him. He vowed a "cultural war against Israeli tyranny". His Egyptian allies indulged in the usual conspiracy theories, including accusations of racism, of North versus South bigotry, the clash of cultures, threats against Hosni's supporters, betrayals, and the charges of bribery that almost all losing Egyptian candidates for leading international positions claim. But a closer look at Hosni's campaign management and conduct reveals that if it resembled anything, it was a comedy of errors. His campaign hardly got off to a good start. Hosni had already shot himself in the foot before his candidature was announced with his book- burning statement, words for which he later would not only apologise but bend over backwards to appease Israel. His apology, combined with remarks to a headscarf-wearing Egyptian journalist that the headdress was "regressive" and a "sign of backwardness", riled a good segment of the Egyptian public. It is true that his book-burning statement was blown out of proportion but the damage had already been done, particularly with a European public to whom the burning of books has ugly historical connotations. To his opponents, it was a heaven-sent blunder. They levelled the all too familiar accusation of anti- Semitism. To independent observers, Hosni's statement and then equally strong reversal reflected inconsistency. Hosni's campaign was structurally flawed. In their coalition-building effort its organisers relied too heavily on commitments from regional groups such as the 52-member African Union, the Arab group of states, the faith- based Organisation of the Islamic Conference and some sympathetic European and South American governments. They also lobbied individual members of UNESCO's Executive Board, members of one group or another. They followed the political tactics usually pursued in seeking support for draft resolutions tabled at the United Nations or one of its organs. The strategy begins with winning the approval of one group of countries -- say, the Arab group. Then it moves up a level, to a wider group like the African or the Latin American and Caribbean Group, before being presented to the group of non-aligned countries which, in turn, sends it, with its blessings, to the largest group, the Group of 77 Developing Countries and China, with 131 member states, where it is endorsed and assured of passing with a majority of votes. It is political back- scratching given elevated to honourable policy, what former US Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who served in the mid-1970s as permanent representative to the United Nations, called "the automatic majority". It works well in public record voting, particularly when the resolution is innocuous, such as the annual votes in disarmament. It does not work in institutions like UNESCO, where the ballot is secret and the pledge may extend no further than the lips that uttered it. The automatic majority vote unravelled, replaced by individual state interests, post-colonial affiliations, questions of financial donations and political favours. Only this can explain how, for months, Hosni's cohorts boasted of endorsement by the African Union conferences at both Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and Serte, Libya, and the Arab Summit conference, in addition to the support of the US, France and a host of European and Latin American countries. As it turned out, and in the words of Hosni himself, only three or four African countries supported and/or voted for his candidacy, one Arab country lobbied hard against him, both the US and France were equivocal, and a number of East European and Nordic countries actively opposed his candidacy. One lesson of the UNESCO campaign is that solid regional coalitions, even when vouched at the summit level, remain little more than a courtesy gesture. In a changing world, once cohesive blocs have fragmented. A new world disorder, based on individual self-interest, has prevailed. Age is always a consideration when it comes to international appointments. Former UN secretary-general Boutros Boutros-Ghali was 68 years old when he started his bid for the post. Some countries, particularly the United Kingdom, informally expressed concern about his age -- he would have turned 79 by the time he completed his second term as secretary-general. To pre-empt such questions he went around telling governments he wanted to serve only one five-year term. It eventually worked against him when he coveted a second term and was opposed by the US, which campaigned against him in favour of Kofi Annan. When, in October 1996, a high-level Egyptian dignitary asked president Bill Clinton what he had against Boutros Boutros-Ghali as a second term candidate, he answered: "I have nothing against him. He told me in this White House he wanted only one term." That sealed the argument. In addition, the gender factor came into play. At 57, Irina Bokova, the newly- elected secretary-general of UNESCO, is not only in the right age bracket but also gender-right. For almost two decades, the United Nations system has been trying to promote global gender equality. It started with its own secretariat and serving staff, with the explicit target of achieving gender equality by the year 2000. From this perspective, the candidacy of Bokova and her eventual election made sense to members of UNESCO's Executive Board. The election of a head of a United Nations agency or organisation is not a process of natural selection, it is not survival of the fittest; rather it is a hair-splitting preference among the candidates. Because of his controversial profile, statements and the strong state machinery backing him, Hosni launched the fiercest campaign. However, his handicaps made him an easy target for detractors. He and his Egyptian cohorts complained that UNESCO's election process had been "politicised". But every United Nations organisation is political. Their work programmes are shaped by the political decisions of member governments. Hosni's candidacy was a political decision too, and the relentless campaign he launched was a political campaign. Hosni was no better or worse than the other candidates vying for the UNESCO top post. That he was running at all was the result of private decisions, not a national choice. His candidacy was perceived in some quarters as a reward for his long and loyal ministerial service. Some Egyptian intellectuals opposed his selection, believing there were other, more qualified Egyptian candidates for the post. The Egyptian government, however, made the nomination a matter of personal favour. If the Egyptian government had wanted to secure the leadership of UNESCO for national prestige, not as personal reward, it should have nominated the minister of international cooperation, Fayza Abul-Naga. With her professional background in diplomacy, experience with international organisations and character, she would have won hands down. * The writer is former Al-Ahram correspondent in Washington, DC. He also served as director of United Nations Radio and Television in New York.
