The U.N. or else...

MadArchitect · Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2005 9:10 pm Post subject: The U.N. or else...

The "What About Syria?" thread has raised a question that probably should have occured to me a long time ago, if not before then at least during all of the turmoil over whether the U.S. should have been accountable to the U.N. for their invasion of Iraq. For the benefit of discussion, I'll raise it here in two forms, one specific and one more general.

Specific: Should the U.N. serve as a kind of world police force or regulating body for the interchange between nations, and if so, under what, if any, authority?

General: Is it reasonable to assume that any super-political body could police or regulate the interactions between nations, and if so, how ideally would such a body work?

pctacitus · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:22 am Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

Who can really trust the UN, they are not answerable to anyone and when you have things like a Libyan run Human Rights Commission, how can you trust them?

www.defenddemocracy.org/r...topic=7586

www.defenddemocracy.org/p.. ._id=159389

…[T]o ignore the classics is ultimately to weaken the very foundations of our society. - James Atlas, Book Wars: What it Takes to be Educated in America

Edited by: pctacitus at: 4/13/05 5:15 am

Niall001 · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 2:56 am Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

Hold on, the charter of human rights lays down what constitutes a human right. Where is the evidence that such countries are abusing their positions? I couldn't find anything relevant at that site. And I could say the same thing about the US. Given that they abuse human rights, why would I trust them if they ran the organisation? Indeed, the US has done more to cripple the UN than any other member country. The UN is its member states. If there is a problem, it is with the member states.

Truth is that the UN is not the conscience of the world. It is a flawed organisation but it exists for a reason; to stop us destroying ourselves. It is supposed to prevent war except under circumstances where it is necessary. The problem with the UN is that member states don't want it to work properly. Just look at the attitude of the US towards any suggestion of enforcing resolutions involving Israel. Look at what happened somebody like Mary Robinson when she criticised human rights abuses by the big boys.

The UN is above all else, an agreement. You sign up to the conventions and if you break the agreement, the other member states should fulfil their obligation and impose the penalty set down, be that a repremand or military action.

Let us agree, there is no one single reality. Not upon this stage, not in this world, all is in the mind... imagination is the only truth. Because it cannot be contradicted except by other imaginations - Richard Matheson

There are no conclusive indications by which waking life can be distinguished from sleep - Rene Descartes

pctacitus · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 3:25 am Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

I think the UN needs to be made accountable. That's what I like about more transparent organizations, they make mistakes and have problems, but the light shining on them reduces those and at the same time brings them to light. The UN doesn't have that. I feel that unless major changes start happening, the UN will go the way of the League of Nations. The UNHRC can't even decide on whether an action is genocide (see Balkans, Rwanda, etc), so how do they act when they don't know a genocide when they see one, let alone intervene?

…[T]o ignore the classics is ultimately to weaken the very foundations of our society. - James Atlas, Book Wars: What it Takes to be Educated in America

Niall001 · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 3:41 am Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

It has to rely on what the member states bring to it. We have to ensure that our own representitives bring such information to the UN.

Let us agree, there is no one single reality. Not upon this stage, not in this world, all is in the mind... imagination is the only truth. Because it cannot be contradicted except by other imaginations - Richard Matheson

There are no conclusive indications by which waking life can be distinguished from sleep - Rene Descartes

pctacitus · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:08 am Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

Perhaps you might wnat to go back to my link with nothing relevant on it and check two articles. If this is a system we want to keep, we need it to change, quick.

1) Genocidal Neutrality By Joel Mowbray
www.defenddemocracy.org/r...ib_id=7586

Wherin, it is noted that the UN Head of Peacekeeping missions in 1994, not only ignored intelligence from the peacekeepers on the ground but ordered a stop on an operation to destroy arms caches to be used in genocide. The man who gave the order for "neutrality" in that situation was Kofi Annan.

2) Rights Abusers to Rule on Complaints at U.N. By Nicholas Kralev
www.defenddemocracy.org/r...ib_id=7586

In this article it is noted that "Cuba, Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia have been elected to a five-member panel that will decide which complaints are heard by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights at its annual meeting in Geneva this spring." Also that, "Members of the Commission on Human Rights include other countries with poor human rights records, such as China, Pakistan, Russia and Sudan, which was re-elected for another three-year term last summer despite accusations of massive abuses in the Darfur region."

…[T]o ignore the classics is ultimately to weaken the very foundations of our society. - James Atlas, Book Wars: What it Takes to be Educated in America

Niall001 · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:51 am Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

I was referring to your allegations regarding Libya.

I'll read those articles in full when I have time. Truth is though, I'm skeptical as to the worth of articles on that site. Another article accuses sections of the UN of being anti-semitic.

Let us agree, there is no one single reality. Not upon this stage, not in this world, all is in the mind... imagination is the only truth. Because it cannot be contradicted except by other imaginations - Richard Matheson

There are no conclusive indications by which waking life can be distinguished from sleep - Rene Descartes

pctacitus · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 5:13 am Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

The article you characterize as claiming the UN is anti-semitic I assume is Give Israel Equal Treatment and Representation By U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
www.defenddemocracy.org/r...ib_id=7586

This article advocates "...measures to ensure that Israel is afforded equal treatment and representation while addressing the anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic component that is pervasive in many U.N. bodies and affiliated agencies."

It cites the following examples of unfair treatment:
"The 1975 U.N. resolution equating Zionism with racism stands out as an example of this bias and outright bigotry. While this was the most notorious illustration of its anti-Jewish sentiment at the United Nations, there have been many others.

• During the 1991 session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Syria's U.N. representative repeated the Damascus blood libel that Jews killed Christian children to use their blood to make matzoth.

• In 1997, the Palestinian representative charged that the Israeli government had injected 300 Palestinian children with the HIV virus.

• The goals of the 2001 UN World Conference Against Racism were undermined by hateful anti-Jewish rhetoric and anti-Israel political agendas, prompting both Israel and the United States to withdraw their delegations from the conference."

…[T]o ignore the classics is ultimately to weaken the very foundations of our society. - James Atlas, Book Wars: What it Takes to be Educated in America

Loricat · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:11 pm Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

Let's get to the 'or else' part of the original question.

I agree that the problems in the UN are caused by the humans who are in it, representing their countries, with their various agendas and prejudices. So, a great idea in theory falls apart with the reality of its execution by human beings who do not have a built-in system of checks and balances...no organization should police itself, no matter its high ideals. ("Who watches the watchmen?")

So, to me, that requires two organizations. What are they?

I was just (re)reading some science fiction, where this emperor had a group of "imperial auditors" -- guys appointed to the posts because of their experience in life and career to troubleshoot whatever situation that needed them. One thing the men had in common was their lack of ambition to the position -- having either more than enough money, enough power, or a lack of desire for it, they were all essentially beyond ambition, and thus, theoretically, unbribable, uncorruptible.

A lovely fantasy, or real and possible? I'm so cynical about people in any position of power, that I can't believe that anyone who would want to be in the rarefied world of politics would be honest in any real form.

Lori

"All beings are the owners of their deeds, the heirs to their deeds."

Niall001 · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 1:19 pm Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

That's right pc.

The lady doesn't provide any references, so I won't take her word on the matter.

Regardless, I don't see any evidence that Israel is somehow some sort of victim of inequality at the UN. Even if the evidence the representitive provided was accurate, it doesn't follow that the UN is somehow intrinsically opposed to Israel. If the Palestinian representitive made an anti-semetic allegation, then it is the Palestinian representitive that is anti-semetic.

As for the 1975 resolution, I don't know anything about it. I'm busy at the moment but I want to look that one up. Even so, it is the member states that posted the resolution. The UN is its member states. They are the ones that require alteration, not the UN. As for the 2001 conference, it sounds like bullshit. But I'll look it up nonetheless. And yet again, how would the fact that somebody said something inappropriate at a conference suggest that the UN is intrinsically opposed to Israel?

Lori, finding some qualified without an ideological agenda would be impossible in my opinion. Nice idea all the same. As for who watches the watchmen, I think the idea is that organisation's constitution is supposed to limit its power. It doesn't work, but it seems like the best possible option.

Back to work.

Let us agree, there is no one single reality. Not upon this stage, not in this world, all is in the mind... imagination is the only truth. Because it cannot be contradicted except by other imaginations - Richard Matheson

There are no conclusive indications by which waking life can be distinguished from sleep - Rene Descartes

pctacitus · Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 3:52 pm Post subject: Re: The U.N. or else...

Lori, if you can find people who not be corrupted, they are not people.Humans can be compromised in many different ways. The best way I can see is a system with transparency, checks and balances and membership priviliges based on actions (such as how the initial entrance fee to the UN was fighting on the allied side in WWII). Perhaps an Organization of Democracies who are currently fighting Al-Qaeda and its affiliates.

…[T]o ignore the classics is ultimately to weaken the very foundations of our society. - James Atlas, Book Wars: What it Takes to be Educated in America


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT