Thursday, July 20, 2006

I've just reached the end of my support for the UN.

The UN is now threatening Israel with War crimes charges. Read more here. Only a little shot across the bows but never the less a verbal threat.

This is now the end for me for my support of the UN.

Now let me put a few statements down.
1) I think we need an organisation with the general aims of the UN.
2) I think we need one that can influence world events.
3) I think we need one that acts as a democracy across the whole world.

I don't think the current UN, as is, does any of that. Nor can it do so.

1) It doesn't seem to follow it's own aims. It picks and chooses what it is going to deal with and in general, probably all we hear about, it makes things worse.
2) It's only influence seems to be the power of the US. Where it conflicts with US policy it is useless.
3) How can it act democratically when countries like the US and China have, theoretically, the exact same influence as Darfur. The vetoes are not exactly fine tuning. They are blunt instruments intended to ensure no one powerful got forced into anything. Probably because they would take their ball home if they didn't.

I think the UN needs to be completely revamped. It's goals scaled down and only certain parts are regenerated. With full backing from all countries, including the US and the UK, where everyone gets a say proportionally, by heads of population but costs are to the same proportions. In addition it needs to forget chasing ghosts such a civilian disarmament and political games such as starting or policing wars and stick to things like providing aid, food, medical supplies and clothing, and general security, shelter, power/water infrastructure and recovery ops, where required. When that is working then look at expanding the role towards what they thought they were doing. Financial, war crimes trials, disarmament and politics is way down the line. Perhaps never.

This latest threat from them just shows how biased the current UN is.
They threaten war crimes because of targeting civilian areas. Falluja anyone.
They threaten war crimes because of disproportional response. 100,000+ Iraqis.

At least Israel is fighting for it's life we can say that for the coalition. So if they want to get someone for war crimes why don't they go for Blair and Howard. They were not attacked and yet instigated a vigilante action against who they thought was involved. In the UK, and I would have thought the US and Oz, you, and your partners, would get jailed for that. Just a thought, Blair must be within reach, hint hint. If you want to show you are serious.

As of now I think the UN is a flawed monster and should be disbanded and replaced by something more along the lines of the Red Cross or Médecins Sans Frontières, as examples. Let's get rid of all these corrupt and useless politicians. Jeez, I didn't think anyone would be as bad as our bunch but these seem to fit the bill and I've reached the end of my tether with these and the similarly crap EU.


Post a Comment

<< Home