A letter to the blog from the UN Global Compact
In my Los Angeles Times op-ed on the Davos forum, I wrote the following passage: [Davos] is a useful place for politicians to launch new, grandiose initiatives that never quite live up to their billing. Former Secretary-General Kofi Annan launched the U.N.’s Global Compact there in 1999. The U.S. proposed a Middle East Free Trade ...
In my Los Angeles Times op-ed on the Davos forum, I wrote the following passage: [Davos] is a useful place for politicians to launch new, grandiose initiatives that never quite live up to their billing. Former Secretary-General Kofi Annan launched the U.N.'s Global Compact there in 1999. The U.S. proposed a Middle East Free Trade Zone in 2003. And British Prime Minister Tony Blair used Davos in 2005 as the platform to launch the G8's climate-change initiative. It now appears that the op-ed has irked someone other than its author. The following is a letter sent to the LA Times and myself from George Kell, the executive director of the UN Global Compact. I don't know if the LAT is running it, but it seems appropriate to run it here: We take serious issue with Daniel Drezner?s characterization of the United Nations Global Compact as one of several ?new, grandiose initiatives that never quite live up to their billing? (Davos? downhill slide, 21 January 2007). What began as a call to action to global business leaders gathered in Davos eight years ago, has since grown to become the world?s largest voluntary corporate citizenship initiative with more than 3,000 participants in over 100 countries. The UN Global Compact has made a significant contribution to the emergence of corporate responsibility not only (and rightly so) as a moral obligation, but also as a management imperative. Every day, corporations around the globe are leading by example, aligning their strategies and operations with the Global Compact?s universal principles while driving value for their business and developing new opportunities. While certainly much remains to be done, scores of projects have been implemented that are delivering very real and tangible benefits with regard to environmental and social issues. These are documented on our website (www.unglobalcompact.org) and include programs related to HIV/AIDS, child labour, climate change, anti-corruption and general poverty alleviation. In addition, the Global Compact has inspired several high-profile initiatives that are embedding principles and values in a number of important areas, ranging from financial market operations to the training and education of tomorrow?s business leaders. To many of our stakeholders and constituents, including a large number of early critics, the Global Compact has not just lived up to its billing - it has exceeded it. UPDATE: To defend my position just a little, I based my statement on two facts -- 1) The low rate of participation in the Global Compact by companies in two countries that kind of matter -- the United States and China Click here for more -- though a point for them for getting Microsoft to sign on. Second, as the Global Compact itself acknowledges, an awfu lot of companies appeared to sign on and then did nothing for quite a while.
In my Los Angeles Times op-ed on the Davos forum, I wrote the following passage:
[Davos] is a useful place for politicians to launch new, grandiose initiatives that never quite live up to their billing. Former Secretary-General Kofi Annan launched the U.N.’s Global Compact there in 1999. The U.S. proposed a Middle East Free Trade Zone in 2003. And British Prime Minister Tony Blair used Davos in 2005 as the platform to launch the G8’s climate-change initiative.
It now appears that the op-ed has irked someone other than its author. The following is a letter sent to the LA Times and myself from George Kell, the executive director of the UN Global Compact. I don’t know if the LAT is running it, but it seems appropriate to run it here:
We take serious issue with Daniel Drezner?s characterization of the United Nations Global Compact as one of several ?new, grandiose initiatives that never quite live up to their billing? (Davos? downhill slide, 21 January 2007). What began as a call to action to global business leaders gathered in Davos eight years ago, has since grown to become the world?s largest voluntary corporate citizenship initiative with more than 3,000 participants in over 100 countries. The UN Global Compact has made a significant contribution to the emergence of corporate responsibility not only (and rightly so) as a moral obligation, but also as a management imperative. Every day, corporations around the globe are leading by example, aligning their strategies and operations with the Global Compact?s universal principles while driving value for their business and developing new opportunities. While certainly much remains to be done, scores of projects have been implemented that are delivering very real and tangible benefits with regard to environmental and social issues. These are documented on our website (www.unglobalcompact.org) and include programs related to HIV/AIDS, child labour, climate change, anti-corruption and general poverty alleviation. In addition, the Global Compact has inspired several high-profile initiatives that are embedding principles and values in a number of important areas, ranging from financial market operations to the training and education of tomorrow?s business leaders. To many of our stakeholders and constituents, including a large number of early critics, the Global Compact has not just lived up to its billing – it has exceeded it.
UPDATE: To defend my position just a little, I based my statement on two facts — 1) The low rate of participation in the Global Compact by companies in two countries that kind of matter — the United States and China Click here for more — though a point for them for getting Microsoft to sign on. Second, as the Global Compact itself acknowledges, an awfu lot of companies appeared to sign on and then did nothing for quite a while.
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy

Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.

The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.

Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.

How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.