• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The United Nations - Its utility, and its future

Goober

Full Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
210
What are your thoughts on the future of the UN?

After the US showed the world the UN is ineffective and unimportant when they invaided Iraq, the UN is looking to create a true multilateral organization that the world today needs.

They could succeed, or fail, I hope they succeed, but judging by the state the world is in now, it will be a hard road to travel.

A good article:
http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pub&dt=040529&cat=international&st=internationald82s35700&src=ap
 
Many of the the soldiers I‘ve talked to who served under the UN (UNPROFOR) say they will never put on a blue beret again....
 
Well think about this BATMAN;
??? The composition of the United Nations is every government of the planet put into the same room in New York City. But every member state has it‘s own priorities. The best interests of the world are not always put first, and not everyone has a say.
??? Unfortunately many people in the world especially Canadians, have this almighty view of the United Nations. But look at the decision makers at the UN Security Council US, Brits, French, China and Russia. And if their best interests are not reflected, then they may veto a resolution, call for an inquiry, a special envoy, any of these will delay UN action.
??? Also the UN has no troops, it relies on contributing Nations, and besides the US, Brits, and French, no nation has the ability to project a self sustaining Combined Armed Task Force on a moments notice.
But the failure of the UN on any mission is not the responsibility of any one Nation, but of the governments of every nation.
Now if you argue that US has made the UN seem ineffective by invading Iraq, well it was US whos‘ lobbying was able to get the UN inspectors back into Iraq. Iran, N/Korea has also kick inspectors of their countries, resolutions against Isreal are passed every month. I beleave it was Pearson who recognized the developing gap of the 1st World Nations and Developing states and recommended that 0.7% of the a 1st World Nations GDP be contributed through the UN to help close that gap. Canada is around 0.14%.
My long winded point I trying to make that US is not the only one to blame.
Two really good books to read are "Shaking Hands with the Devil" allows a good insight about the DPKO and "The CNN Effect" is good statiscal read about the relationship of Foreign Policy and the Media.
 
Also, I think it is extremely optimistic to believe the UN is the body to solve all world problems. It is not a problem solver. The structure of the UN and human nature prevent it.
The UN serves as a forum for discussion and
manages agencies as best it can.

No matter what, each member state has its own agenda and priorities, and will move in its own self-interest. Dispite the haggling that goes on, the UN is one of the best forums where
countries can get together and talk in public and
in secret back rooms. Issues progress with communication, result in consensus, or
bog down with self-interest.

In my opinion, the UN did not fail when "After the US showed the world the UN is ineffective and unimportant when they invaided Iraq". Rather, the UN provided the forum for discussion and
debate. And there was debate. The UN was
preceived to fail because the US acted on its own
beliefs rather than on the consensus of most members. That is not a failure of the UN. The US made a decision and acted on it as all countries are free to do. The consequences
however may be good, bad, bitter, or inevitable.
 
Bert said:
Also, I think it is extremely optimistic to believe the UN is the body to solve all world problems.  It is not a problem solver.  The structure of the UN and human nature prevent it.
The UN serves as a forum for discussion and
manages agencies as best it can.  

No matter what, each member state has its own agenda and priorities, and will move in its own self-interest.  Dispite the haggling that goes on, the UN is one of the best forums where
countries can get together and talk in public and
in secret back rooms.  Issues progress with communication, result in consensus, or
bog down with self-interest.

In my opinion, the UN did not fail when "After the US showed the world the UN is ineffective and unimportant when they invaided Iraq".  Rather, the UN provided the forum for discussion and
debate.  And there was debate.  The UN was
preceived to fail because the US acted on its own
beliefs rather than on the consensus of most members.  That is not a failure of the UN.  The US made a decision and acted on it as all countries are free to do.  The consequences
however may be good, bad, bitter, or inevitable.

Good points. :salute:
 
This story, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Ottawa Citizen, tells us that the United Nations remains predictable:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Canadian+tossed+from+over+Israel+remarks/2195614/story.html
Canadian tossed from UN over Israel remarks
Scholar critical of report alleging Gaza war crimes

By Steven Edwards, Canwest News Service

November 7, 2009

Guards at the United Nations whisked away a UN-accredited Canadian commentator this week after she denounced a controversial report that focuses heavily on alleged Israeli war crimes.

Anne Bayefsky, a York University political science professor, offered the only pro-Israel commentary at a microphone outside the UN General Assembly Hall on Thursday night following remarks by the assembly's Libyan president, Ali Treki, and the chief Palestinian official at the UN, Riyad Mansour.

Arab and Muslim countries had overcome western opposition in the adoption of a resolution endorsing the report by South African judge Richard Goldstone, which focuses on the Israeli assault last winter on Gaza.

Bayefsky said the guards confiscated two UN passes the organization had issued to her as director of Touro Law Center's Institute on Human Rights and The Holocaust, and ejected her from the building after questioning her.

UN-based blogger Matt Lee said that Mansour, after being told a "pro-Israel non-governmental organization" had spoken at the mike, asked: "Did we capture them?" Lee said he spoke with Mansour after the guards led Bayefsky away, and security officials were unable to confirm Friday night whether they had acted of their own accord, or in response to a complaint.

Treki's spokesman, Jean Victor Nkolo, said Bayefsky was "not authorized at all" to use the mike.

"This is a stakeout for member states and for the General Assembly," he said. "NGOs and private individuals have nothing to do there. Period." Nkolo dismissed the suggestion that Bayefsky would have felt free to approach the mike on the grounds other similarly accredited organizations have done so in the past.

Bayefsky had offered her assessment of the resolution, which gives both Israel and the Palestinians three months to launch "independent credible investigations" into alleged war crimes outlined in the Goldstone report.

Part of her focus was on Hamas, which controls Gaza, but which most western countries list as a terrorist organization.

"The idea that ... a terrorist organization is going to decide for itself whether or not it violates the rule of law is something that, I think, no serious democratic society will take seriously," she said.

"You just have to ask yourselves whether this process has done anything in terms of bolstering the credibility of the United Nations." About five uniformed UN guards surrounded Bayefsky several minutes after she had finished speaking, Bayefsky and witnesses said.

Bayefsky, who also heads the UN watchdog group Eye on the UN, said they took her to the security headquarters section of the building for questioning. Some 15 minutes later, two guards were tasked with escorting her outside the building.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen


More on Anne Bayefsky here and here. She is certainly a scholar but one with an agenda.

But it is nice to see that the UN remains constant in its campaign for (selected) human rights.

 
I am not able to link but I see the shake up at the UN looks interesting.  Sec Gen from the Socialist International, Political Affairs run by Russia, Peacekeeping run by China, Saudi to run Human Rights.  All we need now is Iran running disarmament and Bengal running UN Children's program. 
 
Back
Top