he work of the United Nations and its affiliated organizations in Syria is concentrated in the fields of education and training (workshops, training courses, dialogue sessions and discussions, lectures), and support for economic projects, which include disbursing millions of dollars in the field of training, workshops, seminars, and seminars. But have the United Nations and its affiliated organizations studied the economic feasibility and the real sustainable benefit of disbursing these huge sums? I am not saying that spending these sums is completely useless, but are their benefits equal to the desired and planned benefits, especially in the catastrophic situation in Syria. How is the overall benefit of a workshop, training course, seminar or panel discussion for a group of young people if they are 10, 20 or even 100 people. In addition to the huge amounts spent on economic feasibility studies for projects such as economic, technical, marketing and training studies....etc.
Although the primary goal of all United Nations programs and affiliated organizations are lofty goals, which are to achieve social and economic development that achieves stability and sustainable prosperity. However, I see that the mechanism of disbursing these funds is not commensurate with the returns and benefits that are achieved on the ground of the Syrian reality in the medium and long term.
I think that the best solution is to focus the United Nations and its affiliated organizations on small investment projects that are characterized by direct support and in very small amounts that can achieve very large benefits in a practical, wide-reaching and sustainable way.
Estimado, Sabri
La presencia de las Naciones Unidas en países en conflicto se da a partir de varios organismos internacionales con misionalidades distintas pero complementarias. Ej. ACNUR atención a población refugiada, solicitante de asilo, y desplazada interna, pueden tener algunas iniciativas de medios de vida. OACNUD centrada en el análisis de la violación de DDHH y DIH no tienen iniciativas de medios de vida pero sugieren a las otras agencias alternativas. PNUD tiene una misionalidad más centrada en desarrollo humano y sus iniciativas pueden cubrir apuestas productivas. Ahora, en cada pías en guerra, no todas las agencias hacen presencia, por lo cual, las iniciativas productivas puedan no estar financiadas, en ese sentido se debe analizar en integralidad que tipo de presencia de agencias de la ONU existen
Con aprecio
Harold Juajibioy
Dear Harold Juajibioy
Thank you very much for your kind response, and what you said is absolutely correct, but we hope that since we are suffering from and living through the scourge of war, the United Nations will focus on small productive programs capable of helping and supporting people to live in addition to achieving sustainable economic development.
all respect to you
Dr. Sabri
Dear Sabri Hasan
The UN and its allies are benefitting from the conflict that is prevailing in the middle east and other parts of the world such as Africa.Members of the united nations benefit from the sales of weapons to these wartorn regions and the only thing that will effect the abolishing of wars all over the world is if the American and British governments stop selling weapons to countries such as Israel and other authoritarian regimes.The Un is very hypocritical in all their claims.
Dear Tshepang Ngoasheng
What you say is true. But I would add that there is great corruption in the UN organization by not supporting direct production projects.
- Badges
- Science topic