Renovation may leave UN without a home

Independent
By David Usborne in New York
06 April 2005


Critics of the United Nations would probably not mind seeing its headquarters, primarily designed by the guru of the International Style, Le Corbusier, razed to the ground. That will not happen. However, the elegant slab of concrete and glass on New York's East River does have to be vacated soon.

A six-year renovation of the entire 52-year-old UN campus, extending not just to the 38-storey tower but also all the associated buildings around it, is due to get under way in 2007. There is no ducking the work, because the place is not just dilapidated but in some respects quite dangerous. The roofs leak, carcinogenic asbestos is everywhere and there is no fire sprinkler system.

But there is a problem. The organisation that worries so much about providing shelter to refugees around the world may soon be in need of the same kind of assistance itself. In two years, it may be homeless. Plans to build a new tower on an empty lot on 42nd Street have fallen foul of state politicians who, disgusted by recent scandals, have baulked at providing the necessary authorisation.

Yesterday, Kofi Annan, the secretary general, spoke to staff members about the impact of the scandals on morale. "I know it has cast a shadow over all of us and you have no idea what a personal pain it has been for me as secretary general and as a father having to deal with this situation," he said, alluding to the involvement of his son, Kojo, in the ongoing oil-for-food corruption inquiry.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=626807

makes me think of an old chicago landlord trick. when they want to get rid of you, but can't, legally, they like to find things that need to be "fixed" in your apartment. things like, say, your front door needs to be taken off, and left off for a few days. hmmmm.

Realistically, I can't imagine why the U.N. would want to stay in
a country whose goverment reviles them so (and refuses to pay the
dues owed).

Geneva would probably be a lot more pleasant and the U.N. already has
a lot of operations based there.

Tesha

a standing invitation to move to Montreal Canada

.
.
.

the US is probably bugging their "new" home as we speak

From the article:

"Washington, for all its grumpiness with the UN, has made clear it wants it to stay on US soil. It brings money and tourists to New York and, of course, is a trove of intelligence for American spies."

Really?

would the US do such a thing?

anyhoo

It might improve the world's view of the UN if they moved out of the most warmongering nation on the planet?

I hear dem Canuks are a pretty mellow lot :silly:

include in the "renovations"?

This article reminds me of the US embassy in Moscow -- the KGB wired the walls with listening devices.

Since the bushie gang is more like the old KBB -- seems like they would put in some sub-contractors and wire the whole damned UN building.

The UN really should move to a neutral country.