Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

UN First report of the Secretary-General pursuant to


Butifldrm
 Share

Recommended Posts

UN Meeting on Iraq November 29th 2012

11:00 AM Security Council: The situation concerning Iraq

First report of the Secretary-General pursuant to resolution 2061 (2012) (S/2012/848)

United Nations S/2012/848

Security Council Distr.: General

16 November 2012

First report of the Secretary-General pursuant to

resolution 2061 (2012)

I. Introduction

1. In paragraph 6 of its resolution 2061 (2012), the Security Council requested

me to report to it every four months on the progress made towards the fulfilment of

the responsibilities of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI).

The present report is the first submitted pursuant to that resolution. It provides an

update on the activities carried out by the United Nations in Iraq since the issuance

of my previous report, dated 11 July 2012 (S/2012/535). It covers key political

developments and regional and international events, in addition to operational and

security matters concerning Iraq.

II. Summary of key political developments pertaining to Iraq

Full Report:

http://www.un.org/ga...mbol=S/2012/848

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Butifldrm nice find

A historic opportunity is at hand for Iraq and Kuwait to normalize their

relations and for Iraq to bring to an end its outstanding obligations under

Chapter VII of the Charter. I urge both parties to pursue their efforts, with goodwill

and a firm commitment to building on the progress that they have made to date, and

to implement all agreements reached between them. Both I, and UNAMI under its

Security Council mandate to facilitate regional dialogue, will continue to engage

with both sides to support and sustain the necessary progress.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the majority of the UNSC meeting. Kubler requests UNAMI to stay in Iraq through out 2013, even though 30,000 million dollars worth of budget cuts. The council is deliberating now, but IMO things did not go well as far as full release from Chapter VII.

Waiting for announcement of findings

http://webtv.un.org/live-now/watch/security-council-media-stakeout/1677362996001

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe that GOD cares about whether the Dinar will revalue or not. I do believe that he cares about whether you are going to be with him or eternally seperated from him. Your focus should be on him and not what the Dinar is going to do or not do!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't see how an rv can happen without chapter 7 being lifted so I'm guessing we won't be cashing in Jan 1 :(src="http://dinarvets.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif"> trying to keep the faith but its soooo hard. This is beginning to look more like a 20 year plan rather than a 10 year plan.

Hi Tenneseegirl, I urge you to please listen to Breitling (breitling currency blogspot) as he presents very credible info (IMO) as to why we do not need Ch 7 release in order for the dinar to rv.

Edited by Alexyn1006
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am NOT a fan of the UN, but their report seems to reflect what we read. Just feels a little more discouraging to hear a person speaking normal English to describe what we read in "Iraqispeak Translations" which make little sense sometimes. Hearing him speak about the insanity of the Iraq Gov. and how corrupt they are....oh my...big sigh...they are rich...but stupid...

So...how much power does the UN REALLY have over anyone? Iraq or US?

They were at some of our voting areas...so what...they cannot do anything about how we vote...so...what the heck does the UN really have to do with Iraq?

Just heard the stinking UN gave special status to Palestine!! SHUT THE UN DOWN!!! OK I AM SORRY BUT I AM TICKED!!! :butt-kicking:/> I would like to kick them out of the US!

Thank you for letting me vent!! <_</>

Edited by abby01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Tenneseegirl, I urge you to please listen to Breitling (breitling currency blogspot) as he presents very credible info (IMO) as to why we do not need Ch 7 release in order for the dinar to rv.

Alexyn, I agree Iraq has the ability to adjust their currency to the appropriate rate since Dec. 2010. http://www.hm-treasu...ctions_iraq.htm . Yet, I also find it interesting that, Kubler, made no issue of the Central Bank Delima.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't see how an rv can happen without chapter 7 being lifted so I'm guessing we won't be cashing in Jan 1 sad.gif trying to keep the faith but its soooo hard. This is beginning to look more like a 20 year plan rather than a 10 year plan.

chapter 7 has NO bearing on Iraq revaluing their currency like i mentioned un sanctions are more for war, borders and reparations. Articles are through the IMF which deal with currency. Don't read too much into Iraq having to be lifted out of chapter 7 in order to revalue because its irrelevant.

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

chapter 7 has NO bearing on Iraq revaluing their currency like i mentioned un sanctions are more for war, borders and reparations. Articles are through the IMF which deal with currency. Don't read too much into Iraq having to be lifted out of chapter 7 in order to revalue because its irrelevant.

Your posts confuse the heck out of me. Forgive me for saying so but your credibility is waning. I respect your opinion but you contridict yourself quite often. In a March 2012 post you stated..........

It's not internationally recognized unless they are removed from chapter 7 sanctions thats my understanding. The whole purpose Iraq was under those sanctions was due to Saddam not wanting to play nice with the IMF he wanted to set his own rate and obviously because of war. I seriously hope they will be removed from all chapter 7 sanctions soon Maliki goes to kuwait in mid March im hoping they announce the removal at the summit.

Read more:

That quote was taken directly from your post. So which is ist? Are they interrelated or not? You speak as though what you are saying is fact but it would seem that you are not really even sure what you are trying to communicate. I guess what I am trying to say is that there is no consistancy in your posts.

You stated that they can revalue their currency without Ch 7 being lifted. I 100% agree. "In country" at this very moment they can revalue their currency to anything they want but if their currency is not internationally recognized it is completely worthless to us as investors. The only way it can be internationally recognized, according to your own post, is if Chapter 7 sanctions are lifted. So how can you say that one has nothing to do with the other. It just does not make any sense. Am I missing something? I don't mean to throw you under the bus or bash you but when I see someone playing the game from both ends of the table I have to throw my cards down and call a spade a spade. I would love clarification if you can make any sense out of it.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

UN Meeting on Iraq November 29th 2012

11:00 AM Security Council: The situation concerning Iraq

First report of the Secretary-General pursuant to resolution 2061 (2012) (S/2012/848)

United Nations S/2012/848

Security Council Distr.: General

16 November 2012

First report of the Secretary-General pursuant to

resolution 2061 (2012)

I. Introduction

1. In paragraph 6 of its resolution 2061 (2012), the Security Council requested

me to report to it every four months on the progress made towards the fulfilment of

the responsibilities of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI).

The present report is the first submitted pursuant to that resolution. It provides an

update on the activities carried out by the United Nations in Iraq since the issuance

of my previous report, dated 11 July 2012 (S/2012/535). It covers key political

developments and regional and international events, in addition to operational and

security matters concerning Iraq.

II. Summary of key political developments pertaining to Iraq

Full Report:

http://www.un.org/ga...mbol=S/2012/848

Iraq parliament Sat 1st Dec.

Eighth: the first reading of the draft law on ratification of an agreement between the United Nations and the Republic of Iraq on the activities of the United Nations Mission to provide assistance to Iraq. (Foreign Relations Committee, the Legal Committee). (2 items).

Read more:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your posts confuse the heck out of me. Forgive me for saying so but your credibility is waning. I respect your opinion but you contridict yourself quite often. In a March 2012 post you stated..........

It's not internationally recognized unless they are removed from chapter 7 sanctions thats my understanding. The whole purpose Iraq was under those sanctions was due to Saddam not wanting to play nice with the IMF he wanted to set his own rate and obviously because of war. I seriously hope they will be removed from all chapter 7 sanctions soon Maliki goes to kuwait in mid March im hoping they announce the removal at the summit.

Read more:

That quote was taken directly from your post. So which is ist? Are they interrelated or not? You speak as though what you are saying is fact but it would seem that you are not really even sure what you are trying to communicate. I guess what I am trying to say is that there is no consistancy in your posts.

You stated that they can revalue their currency without Ch 7 being lifted. I 100% agree. "In country" at this very moment they can revalue their currency to anything they want but if their currency is not internationally recognized it is completely worthless to us as investors. The only way it can be internationally recognized, according to your own post, is if Chapter 7 sanctions are lifted. So how can you say that one has nothing to do with the other. It just does not make any sense. Am I missing something? I don't mean to throw you under the bus or bash you but when I see someone playing the game from both ends of the table I have to throw my cards down and call a spade a spade. I would love clarification if you can make any sense out of it.

This is not true, Ch7 sanctions were imposed on 6th Aug 1990 and relate to the Kuwait issue. They are obviously an impediment to progress but a separate issue.

IMF Article 8 is NORMALLY an indication of a recognised currency as this guarantees redemption by the central bank. Iraq has to accept the obligations of Article 8. Under the circumstances I suspect that this may be in the pipeline but will not be made public until any proposed currency reform has taken place.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your posts confuse the heck out of me. Forgive me for saying so but your credibility is waning. I respect your opinion but you contridict yourself quite often. In a March 2012 post you stated..........

It's not internationally recognized unless they are removed from chapter 7 sanctions thats my understanding. The whole purpose Iraq was under those sanctions was due to Saddam not wanting to play nice with the IMF he wanted to set his own rate and obviously because of war. I seriously hope they will be removed from all chapter 7 sanctions soon Maliki goes to kuwait in mid March im hoping they announce the removal at the summit.

Read more: http://dinarvets.com.../#ixzz2DfhbGiYE

That quote was taken directly from your post. So which is ist? Are they interrelated or not? You speak as though what you are saying is fact but it would seem that you are not really even sure what you are trying to communicate. I guess what I am trying to say is that there is no consistancy in your posts.

You stated that they can revalue their currency without Ch 7 being lifted. I 100% agree. "In country" at this very moment they can revalue their currency to anything they want but if their currency is not internationally recognized it is completely worthless to us as investors. The only way it can be internationally recognized, according to your own post, is if Chapter 7 sanctions are lifted. So how can you say that one has nothing to do with the other. It just does not make any sense. Am I missing something? I don't mean to throw you under the bus or bash you but when I see someone playing the game from both ends of the table I have to throw my cards down and call a spade a spade. I would love clarification if you can make any sense out of it.

i said i have researched it in more depth i didnt know if they could or NOT but what i have read and come to understand is that chapter 7 sanctions have no bearing on whether a country can revalue or not. Also its called learning i can care less if you throw me under the bus it doesnt bother me i was wrong and i admit it we all need to learn.

This is not true, Ch7 sanctions were imposed on 6th Aug 1990 and relate to the Kuwait issue. They are obviously an impediment to progress but a separate issue.

IMF Article 8 is NORMALLY an indication of a recognised currency as this guarantees redemption by the central bank. Iraq has to accept the obligations of Article 8. Under the circumstances I suspect that this may be in the pipeline but will not be made public until any proposed currency reform has taken place.

you are correct sandy thanks for the clarification, I am still learning. So sandyf would Article 8 have to be imposed before they make their currency go international? this was my thinking but read in one of your posts that it didnt matter they could be in Article14 and still make their currency international?

Edited by easyrider
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you are correct sandy thanks for the clarification, I am still learning. So sandyf would Article 8 have to be imposed before they make their currency go international? this was my thinking but read in one of your posts that it didnt matter they could be in Article14 and still make their currency international?

We are looking at separate issues. I commented in the past that Myanmar, in April, had a huge devaluation with an Article 14 currency, what would prevent Iraq from a revaluation under Art 14.

Since then I have seen this statement on an IMF document.

The Second Amendment (1978) implicitly recognized the generalized and extended recourse to transitional arrangements by dropping all references to the war and retitling Article XIV “transitional arrangements” instead of “transitional period.” More substantively, it weakened the distinction between the status of countries accepting the full obligations of Article VIII and those having recourse to the provisions of Article XIV, in two ways. First, acceptance of Article VIII no longer affected the reserve status of a country’s currency. Originally, Article VIII status was the criterion for determining whether a currency was defined as convertible and acceptable for use in Fund operations. That linkage was dropped.

Read more:

Do we really need Article 8? Who knows and does it matter, remember the banks and dealers have been trading IQD for years. I know most have stopped in the US but the last time I looked it was still available on the Nat West website.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.