Is the Bush administration opposed to the UN as a body?

What do you think about the world?
Post Reply
User avatar
archeiron
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1289
Joined: April 14, 2003, 5:39 am

Is the Bush administration opposed to the UN as a body?

Post by archeiron »

I had written off the US-lead coalition that orgnized the invasion of Iraq and its total disdain for the UN as a potentially isolated occurance. However, today I stumbled upon the article quoted below.

Is the Bush administration making it White House policy to work around the UN whenever and whereever possible, or is this not unusual in disaster relief planning because of the slowness of any large bureaucracy?

If the answer is yes, what are the potential positive outcomes of the eventual dissolution of the United Nations?

article link
Bush 'Undermining UN with Aid Coalition'

By Jamie Lyons, PA Political Correspondent

United States President George Bush was tonight accused of trying to undermine the United Nations by setting up a rival coalition to coordinate relief following the Asian tsunami disaster.

The president has announced that the US, Japan, India and Australia would coordinate the world’s response.

But former International Development Secretary Clare Short said that role should be left to the UN.

“I think this initiative from America to set up four countries claiming to coordinate sounds like yet another attempt to undermine the UN when it is the best system we have got and the one that needs building up,” she said.

“Only really the UN can do that job,” she told BBC Radio Four’s PM programme.

“It is the only body that has the moral authority. But it can only do it well if it is backed up by the authority of the great powers.”

Ms Short said the coalition countries did not have good records on responding to international disasters.

She said the US was “very bad at coordinating with anyone” and India had its own problems to deal with.

“I don’t know what that is about but it sounds very much, I am afraid, like the US trying to have a separate operation and not work with the rest of the world through the UN system,” she added.
[65 Storm Warden] Archeiron Leafstalker (Wood Elf) <Sovereign>RETIRED
User avatar
Fash
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4147
Joined: July 10, 2002, 2:26 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: sylblaydis
Location: A Secure Location

Post by Fash »

If the UN wasn't a failed system as full of corruption and greed as any, maybe this wouldn't happen.

The UN lives here on our dime, and the corruption goes against us... key example is the Iraq debacle, with veto power nations getting secret oil deals to veto any action against Iraq, I would've asked the UN to find a new HQ.

I don't think the UN is capable of handling much, especially money.
Fash

--
Naivety is dangerous.
User avatar
Cracc
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 717
Joined: October 31, 2002, 6:33 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Sweden

Post by Cracc »

What is this constant bullshit about the invaildity of the UN? It sure is OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS better then having the US go haywire across the world on it's own accord, but i guess the american bruised ego doesnt see it like that, and when the UN didnt want to go into iraq with them, it was deemed as corrupt and not working.. nice twofacedness there.
Image
User avatar
Cracc
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 717
Joined: October 31, 2002, 6:33 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Sweden

Post by Cracc »

On another note tho, what DOES need to be removed from the UN is the ability to veto.
Image
User avatar
Fash
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4147
Joined: July 10, 2002, 2:26 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: sylblaydis
Location: A Secure Location

Post by Fash »

Cracc wrote:On another note tho, what DOES need to be removed from the UN is the ability to veto.
why remove it?? maybe because 'it doesnt work' ? maybe because it 'invalidates' the UN as an effective body?...
Fash

--
Naivety is dangerous.
User avatar
Seebs
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1158
Joined: June 5, 2003, 3:00 pm
Gender: Male

Post by Seebs »

Not enough checks and balances IMO. How does it go? Asolute Power corrupts Absolutely?

Not sure who these UN officals involved with the Oil/Food situation answer to.
Seeber
looking for a WOW server
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27728
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Post by Winnow »

Bitching about the United States and then having the United Nations mooch off of them is worth a chuckle or two.

If the UN is serious about being respectable, they need to get the fuck out of New York and find another home, pay their own way (many countries owe money), and maybe then they can bitch about Americans.

I'm very near the, "could give a fuck" stage when it comes to the U.N. and foreigners in general that only know how to whine. Maybe some scandinavian country would like to HQ the U.N. and pay the fees of the slacker countries that are in the U.N. If you want to get rid of the corruption, you foot the bill. Until then, France, Germany, Russia, China and whoever else has the power will just veto anything that comes along anyway. The system doesn't work, I'd prefer the UN gets out of New York and see if another country has some magical solution or get rid of it altogether and start from scratch. I'm curious for some responses as to how anything that is created or otherwise altered will be free from corruption and how it's always the fault of the United States.
User avatar
Deward
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1653
Joined: August 2, 2002, 11:59 am
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Post by Deward »

I think the UN is a worthless body in general. They have been sucking the teat of America for years and wasting the money on mostly useless things. In my opinion they are just another layer of management to be paid before the world actually sees any of teh money that goes through the UN. It is like a very bad charity. I don't know exact numbers but we give the UN several billion dollars a year at least. I am sure Annan takes a hefty chunk for his fee too.
Deward
User avatar
Midnyte_Ragebringer
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 7062
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania

Post by Midnyte_Ragebringer »

The concept of the UN is good. I would prefer having world leaders communicate and work out problems over a discussion rather than go to war everytime they disagreed. The UN just needs to be governed and held accountable just like every other organization.
User avatar
Wonko Wenusberg
Star Farmer
Star Farmer
Posts: 451
Joined: July 17, 2002, 7:03 am
Location: Sweden, Stockholm

Post by Wonko Wenusberg »

THE LAW!

The U.N as any other organisation, corporation or state needs to be held on a leash with restrictions and controls. To believe that anyone of those mentioned would work without it is just wrong. The general mass need insight to rise questions and so on.
This is not an easy thing to attain, but it is one solution

As an expample I'll take the excuse of a country called Sweden. The last year the flaws in the gov system and the gov ruled corporations has been flashed so obviously in media and reports. The main ingridient is the lack of control.

This is my humble opinion =)
cweeedit cwuunch
User avatar
Kylere
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3354
Joined: July 3, 2002, 6:26 pm
Location: Flint, Michigan

Post by Kylere »

The UN was a great idea, but like many great ideas time has corrupted it. Not unlike the current method of presidential selection it is no longer acceptable.

It is a bloated, inefficient, corrupt, mismanaged, divided, and nightmarish wreck that needs to be elimated removing the nepotism, and decades long back scratching that wastes as much as it accomplishes is not acceptable in a world body.

Start fresh!
She Dreams in Digital
\"Led Zeppelin taught an entire generation of young men how to make love, if they just listen\"- Michael Reed(2005)
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Post by Sueven »

The UN certainly has its flaws and is currently the battleground for some relatively major disagreements. I support reform but I also support its existence. The United Nations does a lot of good things, even things as simple as giving nations a forum in which to discuss issues. Clearly, it also has virtually no ability to order the United States around. Considering the facts that we just ignore the United Nations when they tell us to do something that we don't want to do and that they provide some goods, why should we support their dissolution?

Europe, led largely by France, is in some respects attempting to position themselves as a political superpower counterweight to the United States. Europe does not have the military might to back up this superpower status in the international system, nor would it be worth it for them to attempt to use military force to change our foreign policy, as our foreign policy is indirectly offensive to them, not directly harmful. This European coalition is then generally unable to successfully influence US actions. They have been using the United Nations as a forum through which they hope to influence US actions by subjecting us to the rule of law.

It is important to realize that the anti-American attitudes that many perceive in the United Nations are not inherent in the United Nations itself but rather the opinions of a faction of Europe projected through an international organization.

It's relatively clear why the United Nations would be the preferred battleground for this European faction. They cannot approach America in military or economic might and thus must seek confrontation using political force in order to win. They control an inordinate amount of power in the United Nations, and the Security Council specifically. Look at it's makeup:

United States
France
Britain
Russia
China

France and Britain are clearly the two nations in that group with the most intertwined interests and identities. Further, neither can even approach the United States and China in terms of real power. The United States and Russia are ideologically similar to France and Britain but somewhat more independent, sometimes agreeing and sometimes disagreeing. China is far different than any of the other four. Europe, controlling two of the five security council seats, possesses drastically more security council power than any other region.

Is there any reason for Europe to have this level of power in the security council? Clearly not. Europe as a region is no more powerful than North America or Asia. France and Britain (and Russia for that matter) are no more powerful, as nations, than India or Japan. The democratic principles of liberty and equality that help shape the core philosophy of the United Nations do not indicate support for a system in which one region of the world would be granted excessive and unearned power because of historical and cultural biases.

The United Nations is not the problem, it's organization is. The Security Council should be arranged in some fashion that drastically increases the diversity of opinions represented and drastically reduces the influence of Europe. Nations like India, Japan, South Africa, and Brazil are every bit as qualified as France, Britain, and Russia, and deserve to have their voices, and the unheard voices they represent, heard.
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27728
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Post by Winnow »

Sueven wrote:The UN certainly has its flaws and is currently the battleground for some relatively major disagreements. I support reform but I also support its existence. The United Nations does a lot of good things, even things as simple as giving nations a forum in which to discuss issues. Clearly, it also has virtually no ability to order the United States around. Considering the facts that we just ignore the United Nations when they tell us to do something that we don't want to do and that they provide some goods, why should we support their dissolution?

Europe, led largely by France, is in some respects attempting to position themselves as a political superpower counterweight to the United States. Europe does not have the military might to back up this superpower status in the international system, nor would it be worth it for them to attempt to use military force to change our foreign policy, as our foreign policy is indirectly offensive to them, not directly harmful. This European coalition is then generally unable to successfully influence US actions. They have been using the United Nations as a forum through which they hope to influence US actions by subjecting us to the rule of law.

It is important to realize that the anti-American attitudes that many perceive in the United Nations are not inherent in the United Nations itself but rather the opinions of a faction of Europe projected through an international organization.

It's relatively clear why the United Nations would be the preferred battleground for this European faction. They cannot approach America in military or economic might and thus must seek confrontation using political force in order to win. They control an inordinate amount of power in the United Nations, and the Security Council specifically. Look at it's makeup:

United States
France
Britain
Russia
China

France and Britain are clearly the two nations in that group with the most intertwined interests and identities. Further, neither can even approach the United States and China in terms of real power. The United States and Russia are ideologically similar to France and Britain but somewhat more independent, sometimes agreeing and sometimes disagreeing. China is far different than any of the other four. Europe, controlling two of the five security council seats, possesses drastically more security council power than any other region.

Is there any reason for Europe to have this level of power in the security council? Clearly not. Europe as a region is no more powerful than North America or Asia. France and Britain (and Russia for that matter) are no more powerful, as nations, than India or Japan. The democratic principles of liberty and equality that help shape the core philosophy of the United Nations do not indicate support for a system in which one region of the world would be granted excessive and unearned power because of historical and cultural biases.

The United Nations is not the problem, it's organization is. The Security Council should be arranged in some fashion that drastically increases the diversity of opinions represented and drastically reduces the influence of Europe. Nations like India, Japan, South Africa, and Brazil are every bit as qualified as France, Britain, and Russia, and deserve to have their voices, and the unheard voices they represent, heard.
B+

Nice job but you didn't mention anything about Germany having veto power which further overvalues the european nations in the United Nations. Fix that for an A. :)
User avatar
Zaelath
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4621
Joined: April 11, 2003, 5:53 am
Location: Canberra

Post by Zaelath »

Perhaps it's just a laughably cynical attempt to add some credibility to the supposed altruistic nature of Team America.

The UN has had some problems lately, but it's kinda ironic to say the US government should take over from it because it's corrupt. Hey, don't use that dirty spoon for surgery, let me lick it and wipe it on my shirt first!
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
User avatar
Karae
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 878
Joined: July 3, 2002, 5:32 pm
Location: Orange County, California
Contact:

Post by Karae »

Winnow wrote: Nice job but you didn't mention anything about Germany having veto power which further overvalues the european nations in the United Nations. Fix that for an A. :)
Germany doesn't have veto power.

The U.N., unfortunately, was doomed as a fair system of global governance when the victorious Allies of WWII (Great Britain, France, Russia, China, and the United States) who created it decided that, rather than use it as an opportunity to make the world a better place, instead used it as an opportunity to consolidate their power.

For the U.N. to ever have credibility those five nations permanent appointments need to be removed and single nation veto powers revoked - perhaps a majority vote of the security council could carry veto power. Until that changes the U.N. will always favor those nations over others, the developed world over the undeveloped.

That being said, is a coalition of four dominated by the U.S. any better? No. Bush clearly favors nationalism over unifications and continually shows that he favors moving backwards rather than forwards. No matter how hard it is fought against, globalized government is an inevitability. Deterritorialization of culture, enforced proximity, globalization of economy, and globalization of culture are forces far to strong to be held at bay. Fighting it will only make the inevitable painful.

In any event, BOTH solutions are fucked up. Though, the administration of OCHA is more or less autonomous from the influence of the Security Council - they do carry out oversight but have no say in its operation - so it is largely removed from the problems associated with the SC.

In reality, Bush's move *is* just another example of him giving the U.N. the finger and trying to install the United States as the international authority. However dangerous it is to have five nations in control of international authority, it is incredibly more dangerous to have one nation in control of it.

P.S. Yes, it's true that France and Britain have the most intertwined interests...if by "intertwined interests" you mean "have hated each since time immemorial." To suggest that France and Great Britain would see eye to eye and conspire against United States interests shows that you have no understanding of the historical and continuining climate of hostility between those two nations.
War pickles men in a brine of disgust and dread.
User avatar
Thess
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1036
Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:34 am
Location: Connecticut

Post by Thess »

I always thought England was happy during the french and indian war, and when the french helped out in the revolutionary war, oh and happy about the dozens of conflicts before that!
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27728
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Post by Winnow »

Karae wrote: Germany doesn't have veto power.
My bad. Replace "having veto power" with "wanting veto power" in my comments about germany and give Sueven an A-.
Japan, Germany to Insist on Veto Power with UN Security Council Seats

9 December 2004

Japan and Germany have jointly declared they want permanent seats on the U.N. Security Council with the veto power of the five current permanent members.

At a news conference, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said it is time to expand the U.N. Security Council.

Mr. Koizumi says any nation joining the five permanent members should have veto power, otherwise it would be discriminatory.

The German chancellor says Japan, Germany, Brazil and India - countries bidding for permanent seats - will discuss the matter.

Mr. Schroeder says Japan and Germany also agree that Africa, as an important part of the world, should also have permanent representation on the Security Council.

In a speech to business leaders earlier in the day, the German Chancellor said all new council members should have the right of veto.

The United Nations is considering expanding the number of permanent council members. Under a format instituted shortly after World War II, the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom, and France have the only permanent seats. That grants them the power to veto U.N. resolutions. The 10 rotating Security Council members have no veto.
Sueven
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3200
Joined: July 22, 2002, 12:36 pm

Post by Sueven »

Winnow wrote:Nice job but you didn't mention anything about Germany having veto power which further overvalues the european nations in the United Nations. Fix that for an A.
I don't believe Germany does have veto power. If you disagree, I'd like a source.

Edit: Saw your post. Don't feel they should be granted it due to the excess of European power already vested in the United Nations. Perhaps if the security council would expand to ~15 members, I would support Germany.
Karae wrote:P.S. Yes, it's true that France and Britain have the most intertwined interests...if by "intertwined interests" you mean "have hated each since time immemorial." To suggest that France and Great Britain would see eye to eye and conspire against United States interests shows that you have no understanding of the historical and continuining climate of hostility between those two nations.
Thess wrote:I always thought England was happy during the french and indian war, and when the french helped out in the revolutionary war, oh and happy about the dozens of conflicts before that!
I'll just respond to you two lovebirds together so one of you can again back up the other with some dopey bullshit after the other one makes an argument.

This is a perfect example of using historical biases which are not applicable in the modern times.

France and Britain are both members of the European Union, meaning that:
-their defense is intertwined due to the EU's belief in collective security.
-their economies are intertwined due to EU policy on imports, exports, and tariffs.
-their borders are open as per EU policy
-their citizens are exposed to European culture, ideology, and ideas in ways that America, Russia, and China are not.

Thess is here talking about France helping the United States in the revolutionary war as if it means shit. If we were to use this example as a basis for our understanding of the modern functioning of the security council, would we not posit that the United States and France would generally be in ideological consensus, with Britain opposed? Does this reflect reality in any way whatsoever?

If you can provide me with a list of ways in which the interests of any other two security council nations are intertwined to the extent that Britain and France's are, I'd be both impressed and appreciative. Sadly, I fear that the only thing you can come up with is "Britain supports the war in Iraq and France opposes it," to which I would remind you:

1. There are events occuring in the world beyond Iraq, and
2. Britain's position is a middle-ground one, for the war but without the fervor of the United States, and
3. This position contradicts your support of the historical alliance between the United States and France.

Any more incoherent anecdotes to throw at me or would you care to make a real argument?
User avatar
Sirton
Star Farmer
Star Farmer
Posts: 474
Joined: July 31, 2002, 5:20 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by Sirton »

Its not hard to see which countries mostly fit to the role of the security council....Perminant members: US, Russia, China, Japan, Germany, England maybe India. France is a joke. Veto powers should be completely wiped out and if your country doesnt' t wish to be part of something, ya don't have to be part of it. That is were the more powerful countries would still hold most of there power, which they should compared to Nigeria, Botswanna, Boliva or some other shit hole.

The UN needs to be revamped just like the League of Nations needed to be redone basically into the UN. The UN is obsolete and too corrupted now for The World body organization.
User avatar
Seebs
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1158
Joined: June 5, 2003, 3:00 pm
Gender: Male

Post by Seebs »

I think Germany still wished to Veto Jews. NOting like a little genocide to fuck up your UN rankings.
Seeber
looking for a WOW server
User avatar
Marbus
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2378
Joined: July 4, 2002, 2:21 am
Contact:

Post by Marbus »

It needs a new leader... a strong leader, one who can control the buracrats! Now if we just had Natalie Portman to call for a vote of no confidence...

Marb
Image
User avatar
Kluden
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1827
Joined: November 13, 2002, 7:12 pm
Location: D.C.

Post by Kluden »

Back to the original post, I think the reason why "Bush" is undermining the UN on the relief fund, is because the UN chided at the amounts being set forth from the US and several of the Western countries.

So, they got together and said, "Fine, fuck you UN, we'll run our own relief to the tsunami victims, and you guys run yours."

I don't think it is fair or right for a peace keeping orginization to say publicly that countries are not giving enough money. The US isn't helping itself by going further into debt for other countries disasters. Its wrong that it happened, the US and other countries are doing what they can to help, and then they get slapped for not giving enough...I've never had a charity tell me "no thanks" when I didn't give the BIG amount they have on the checkbox.
User avatar
Atokal
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1369
Joined: July 4, 2002, 12:23 am

Post by Atokal »

Cracc wrote:What is this constant bullshit about the invaildity of the UN? It sure is OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS better then having the US go haywire across the world on it's own accord, but i guess the american bruised ego doesnt see it like that, and when the UN didnt want to go into iraq with them, it was deemed as corrupt and not working.. nice twofacedness there.
Please provide proof of a single thing the UN has done that really mattered. Please do not provide any evidence using peace-keeping as an arguement. After reading several first hand accounts about these "peacekeeping" forces I have concluded that the forays into other countries to protect the people are merely farces.

The UN is a deplorable organization and needs to be revamped.
Atokal
If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared.
Niccolo Machiavelli
User avatar
Zaelath
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4621
Joined: April 11, 2003, 5:53 am
Location: Canberra

Post by Zaelath »

Atokal wrote:
Cracc wrote:What is this constant bullshit about the invaildity of the UN? It sure is OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS better then having the US go haywire across the world on it's own accord, but i guess the american bruised ego doesnt see it like that, and when the UN didnt want to go into iraq with them, it was deemed as corrupt and not working.. nice twofacedness there.
Please provide proof of a single thing the UN has done that really mattered. Please do not provide any evidence using peace-keeping as an arguement. After reading several first hand accounts about these "peacekeeping" forces I have concluded that the forays into other countries to protect the people are merely farces.

The UN is a deplorable organization and needs to be revamped.
While I won't say the UN doesn't need some work (holy cow, a multinational organisation run by committee isn't perfect, who'd a thunk it?) they've still managed to do a lot of good, against all odds. http://www.un.org/Overview/achieve.html

I'm the first to say a lot of those are "works in progress" or a little doubtful, but I'm sure you can pick something out of there you approve of.

Also, and while I recognise that most Americans are generous, good spirited people, their government is run by a lot of people that could earn more money doing just about anything else. To ask us to accept they all take the massive pay cut for purely altruistic motives is to begger belief, so you have to think a unilaterally orchestrated organisation run by the US will first and foremost look out for it's own interests.

There's a lot to be said for benevolent dictatorships, it's just really had finding someone that's benevolent...
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
User avatar
archeiron
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1289
Joined: April 14, 2003, 5:39 am

Post by archeiron »

Zaelath wrote:
Atokal wrote:
Cracc wrote:What is this constant bullshit about the invaildity of the UN? It sure is OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS better then having the US go haywire across the world on it's own accord, but i guess the american bruised ego doesnt see it like that, and when the UN didnt want to go into iraq with them, it was deemed as corrupt and not working.. nice twofacedness there.
Please provide proof of a single thing the UN has done that really mattered. Please do not provide any evidence using peace-keeping as an arguement. After reading several first hand accounts about these "peacekeeping" forces I have concluded that the forays into other countries to protect the people are merely farces.

The UN is a deplorable organization and needs to be revamped.
While I won't say the UN doesn't need some work (holy cow, a multinational organisation run by committee isn't perfect, who'd a thunk it?) they've still managed to do a lot of good, against all odds. http://www.un.org/Overview/achieve.html

I'm the first to say a lot of those are "works in progress" or a little doubtful, but I'm sure you can pick something out of there you approve of.

Also, and while I recognise that most Americans are generous, good spirited people, their government is run by a lot of people that could earn more money doing just about anything else. To ask us to accept they all take the massive pay cut for purely altruistic motives is to begger belief, so you have to think a unilaterally orchestrated organisation run by the US will first and foremost look out for it's own interests.

There's a lot to be said for benevolent dictatorships, it's just really had finding someone that's benevolent...
For those of you who can't or won't click the link provided, here is the content of that page:
1. Maintaining peace and security - By having deployed a total of 42 peace-keeping forces and observer missions as of September 1996, the United Nations has been able to restore calm to allow the negotiating process to go forward while saving millions of people from becoming casualties of conflicts. There are presently 16 active peace-keeping forces in operation.

2. Making peace - Since 1945, the United Nations has been credited with negotiating 172 peaceful settlements that have ended regional conflicts. Recent cases include an end to the Iran-Iraq war, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, and an end to the civil war in El Salvador. The United Nations has used quiet diplomacy to avert imminent wars.

3. Promoting democracy - The United Nations has enabled people in over 45 countries to participate in free and fair elections, including those held in Cambodia, Namibia, El Salvador, Eritrea, Mozambique, Nicaragua and South Africa. It has provided electoral advice, assistance, and monitoring of results.

4. Promoting development - The UN system has devoted more attention and resources to the promotion of the development of human skills and potentials than any other external assistance effort. The system's annual disbursements, including loans and grants, amount to more than $10 billion. The UN Development Programme (UNDP), in close cooperation with over 170 Member States and other UN agencies, designs and implements projects for agriculture, industry, education, and the environment. It supports more than 5,000 projects with a budget of $1.3 billion. It is the largest multilateral source of grant development assistance. The World Bank, at the forefront in mobilizing support for developing countries worldwide, has alone loaned $333 billion for development projects since 1946. In addition, UNICEF spends more than $800 million a year, primarily on immunization, health care, nutrition and basic education in 138 countries.

5. Promoting human rights - Since adopting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, the United Nations has helped enact dozens of comprehensive agreements on political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights. By investigating individual complaints of human rights abuses, the UN Human Rights Commission has focused world attention on cases of torture, disappearance, and arbitrary detention and has generated international pressure to be brought on governments to improve their human rights records.

6. Protecting the environment - The United Nations has played a vital role in fashioning a global programme designed to protect the environment. The "Earth Summit," the UN Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, resulted in treaties on biodiversity and climate change, and all countries adopted "Agenda 21" - a blueprint to promote sustainable development or the concept of economic growth while protecting natural resources.

7. Preventing nuclear proliferation - The United Nations, through the International Atomic Energy Agency, has helped minimize the threat of a nuclear war by inspecting nuclear reactors in 90 countries to ensure that nuclear materials are not diverted for military purposes.

8. Promoting self determination and independence - The United Nations has played a role in bringing about independence in countries that are now among its Member States.

9. Strengthening international law - Over 300 international treaties, on topics as varied as human rights conventions to agreements on the use of outer space and seabed, have been enacted through the efforts of the United Nations.

10. Handing down judicial settlements of major international disputes - By giving judgments and advisory opinions, the International Court of Justice has helped settle international disputes involving territorial issues, non-interference in the internal affairs of States, diplomatic relations, hostage-taking, the right of asylum, rights of passage and economic rights.

11. Ending apartheid in South Africa - By imposing measures ranging from an arms embargo to a convention against segregated sporting events, the United Nations was a major factor in bringing about the downfall of the apartheid system, which the General Assembly called "a crime against humanity." Elections were held in April 1994 in which all South Africans were allowed to participate on an equal basis, followed by the establishment of a majority government.

12. Providing humanitarian aid to victims of conflict - More than 30 million refugees fleeing war, famine or persecution have received aid from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees since 1951 in a continuing effort coordinated by the United Nations that often involves other agencies. There are more than 19 million refugees, mostly women and children, who are receiving food, shelter, medical aid, education and repatriation assistance.

13. Aiding Palestinian refugees - Since 1950, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) has sustained four generations of Palestinians with free schooling, essential health care, relief assistance and key social services virtually without interruption. There are 2.9 million refugees in the Middle East served by UNRWA.

14. Alleviating chronic hunger and rural poverty in developing countries - The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) has developed a system of providing credit, often in very small amounts, for the poorest and most marginalised groups that has benefited over 230 million people in nearly 100 developing countries.

15. Focusing on African development - For the United Nations, Africa continues to be the highest priority. In 1986, the United Nations convened a special session to drum up international support for African economic recovery and development. The United Nations also has instituted a system-wide task force to ensure that commitments made by the international community are honoured and challenges met. The Africa Project Development Facility has helped entrepreneurs in 25 countries to find financing for new enterprises. The Facility has completed 130 projects which represent investments of $233 million and the creation of 13,000 new jobs. It is expected that these new enterprises will either earn or save some $131 million in foreign exchange annually.

16. Promoting women's rights - A long term objective of the United Nations has been to improve the lives of women and to empower women to have greater control over their lives. Several conferences during the UN-sponsored International Women's Decade set an agenda for the advancement of women and women's rights for the rest of the century. The UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) and the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women (INSTRAW) have supported programmes and projects to improve the quality of life for women in over 100 countries. They include credit and training, access to new food-production technologies and marketing opportunities, and other means of promoting women's work.

17. Providing safe drinking water - UN agencies have worked to make safe drinking water available to 1.3 billion people in rural areas during the last decade.

18. Eradicating smallpox - A 13-year effort by the World Health Organization resulted in the complete eradication of smallpox from the planet in 1980. The eradication has saved an estimated $1 billion a year in vaccination and monitoring, almost three times the cost of eliminating the scourge itself. WHO also helped wipe out polio from the Western hemisphere, with global eradication expected by the year 2000.

19. Pressing for universal immunization - Polio, tetanus, measles, whooping cough, diphtheria and tuberculosis still kill more than eight million children each year. In 1974, only 5 per cent of children in developing countries were immunized against these diseases. Today, as a result of the efforts of UNICEF and WHO, there is an 80 per cent immunization rate, saving the lives of more than 3 million childrean each year.

20. Reducing child mortality rates - Through oral rehydration therapy, water and sanitation and other health and nutrition measures undertaken by UN agencies, child mortality rates in the developing countries have been halved since 1960, increasing the life expectancy from 37 to 67 years.

21. Fighting parasitic diseases - Efforts by UN agencies in North Africa to eliminate the dreaded screw worm, a parasite that feeds on human and animal flesh, prevented the spread of the parasite, which is carried by flies, to Egypt, Tunisia, sub-Saharan Africa and Europe. A WHO programme also has saved the lives of 7 million children from going blind from the river blindness and rescued many others from guinea worm and other tropical diseases.

22. Promoting investment in developing countries - The United Nations, through the efforts of the UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), has served as a "match-maker" for North-South, South-South and East-West investment, promoting entrepreneurship and self-reliance, industrial cooperation and technology transfer and cost-effective, ecologically-sensitive industry.

23. Orienting economic policy toward social need - Many UN agencies have emphasized the need to take account of human needs in determining economic adjustment and restructuring policies and programmes, including measures to safeguard the poor, especially in areas of health and education, and "debt swaps for children."

24. Reducing the effects of natural disasters - The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has spared millions of people from the calamitous effects of both natural and man-made disasters. Its early warning system, which utilizes thousands of surface monitors as well as satellites, has provided information for the dispersal of oil spills and has predicted long-term droughts. The system has allowed for the efficient distribution of food aid to drought regions, such as southern Africa in 1992.

25. Providing food to victims of emergencies - Over two million tons of food are distributed each year by the World Food Programme (WFP). Nearly 30 million people facing acute food shortages in 36 countries benefited from this assistance in 1994.

26. Clearing land mines - The United Nations is leading an international effort to clear land mines from former battlefields in Afghanistan, Angola, Cambodia, El Salvador, Mozambique, Rwanda and Somalia that still kill and maim thousands of innocent people every year.

27. Protecting the ozone layer - The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) have been instrumental in highlighting the damage caused to the earth's ozone layer. As a result of a treaty, known as the Montreal Protocol, there has been a global effort to reduce chemical emissions of substances that have caused the depletion of the ozone layer. The effort will spare millions of people from the increased risk of contracting cancer due to additional exposure to ultraviolet radiation.

28. Curbing global warming - Through the Global Environment Facility, countries have contributed substantial resources to curb conditions that cause global warming. Increasing emissions from burning fossil fuels and changes in land use patterns have led to a build-up of gases in the atmosphere, which experts believe can lead to a warming of the Earth's temperature.

29. Preventing over-fishing - The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) monitors marine fishery production and issues alerts to prevent damage due to over-fishing.

30. Limiting deforestation and promoting sustainable forestry development - FAO, UNDP and the World Bank, through a Tropical Forests Action Programme, have formulated and carried out forestry action plans in 90 countries.

31. Cleaning up pollution - UNEP led a major effort to clean up the Mediterranean Sea. It encouraged adversaries such as Syria and Israel, Turkey and Greece to work together to clean up beaches. As a result, more than 50 per cent of the previously polluted beaches are now usable.

32. Protecting consumers' health - To ensure the safety of food sold in the market place, UN agencies have established standards for over 200 food commodities and safety limits for more than 3,000 food containers.

33. Reducing fertility rates - The UN Population Fund (UNFPA), through its family planning programmes, has enabled people to make informed choices, and consequently given families, and especially women, greater control over their lives. As a result, women in devloping countries are having fewer children - from six births per woman in the 1960s to 3.5 today. In the 1960s, only 10 per cent of the world's families were using effective methods of family planning. The number now stands at 55 per cent.

34. Fighting drug abuse - The UN International Drug Control Programme (UNDCP) has worked to reduce demand for illicit drugs, suppress drug trafficking, and has helped farmers to reduce their economic reliance on growing narcotic crops by shifting farm production toward other dependable sources of income.

35. Improving global trade relations - The UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has worked to obtain special trade preferences for developing countries to export their products to developed countries. It has also negotiated international commodities agreements to ensure fair prices for developing countries. And through the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which has now been supplanted by the World Trade Organization (WTO), the United Nations has supported trade liberalization, that will increase economic development opportunities in developing countries.

36. Promoting economic reform - Together with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations has helped many countries improve their economic management, offered training for government finance officials, and provided financial assistance to countries experiencing temporary balance of payment difficulties.

37. Promoting worker rights - The International Labour Organization (ILO) has worked to guarantee freedom of the right to association, the right to organize, collective bargaining, the rights of indigenous and tribal peoples, promote employment and equal remuneration and has sought to eliminate discrimination and child labour. And by setting safety standards, ILO has helped reduce the toll of work-related accidents.

38. Introducing improved agricultural techniques and reducing costs - With assistance from the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) that has resulted in improved crop yields, Asian rice farmers have saved $12 million on pesticides and governments over $150 million a year in pesticide subsidies.

39. Promoting stability and order in the world's oceans - Through three international conferences, the third lasting more than nine years, the United Nations has spearheaded an international effort to promote a comprehensive global agreement for the protection, preservation and peaceful development of the oceans. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which came into force in 1994, lays down rules for the determination of national maritime jurisdiction, navigation on the high seas, rights and duties of coastal and other states, obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment, cooperation in the conduct of marine scientific research and preservation of living resources.

40. Improving air and sea travel - UN agencies have been responsible for setting safety standards for sea and air travel. The efforts of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) have contributed to making air travel the safest mode of transportation. To wit: In 1947, when nine million travelled, 590 were killed in aircraft accidents; in 1993 the number of deaths was 936 out of the 1.2 billion airline passengers. Over the last two decades, pollution from tankers has been reduced by as much as 60 per cent thanks to the work of the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

41. Protecting intellectual property - The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) provides protection for new inventions and maintains a register of nearly 3 million national trademarks. Through treaties, it also protects the works of artists, composers and authors world-wide. WIPO's work makes it easier and less costly for individuals and enterprises to enforce their property rights. It also broadens the opportunity to distribute new ideas and products without relinquishing control over the property rights.

42. Promoting the free flow of information - To allow all people to obtain information that is free of censorship and culturally unbiased, UNESCO has provided aid to develop and strengthen communication systems, established news agencies and supported an independent press.

43. Improving global communications - The Universal Postal Union (UPU) has maintained and regulated international mail delivery. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) has coordinated use of the radio spectrum, promoted cooperation in assigning positions for stationary satellites, and established international standards for communications, thereby ensuring the unfeterred flow of information around the globe.

44. Empowering the voiceless - UN-sponsored international years and conferences have caused governments to recognize the needs and contributions of groups usually excluded from decision-making, such as the aging, children, youth, homeless, indigenous and disabled people.

45. Establishing "children as a zone of peace" - From El Salvador to Lebanon, Sudan to former Yugoslavia, UNICEF pioneered the establishment of "Days of Tranquillity" and the opening of "Corridors of Peace" to provide vaccines and other assistance desperately needed by children caught in armed conflict.

46. Generating worldwide commitment in support of the needs of children - Through UNICEF's efforts, the Convention on the Rights of the Child entered into force as international law in 1990 and has become law in 166 countries by the end of September 1994; following the 1990 World Summit for Children convened by UNICEF, more than 150 governments have committed to reaching over 20 specific measurable goals to radically improve children's lives by the year 2000.

47. Improving education in developing countries - As a direct result of the efforts of UN agencies, over 60 per cent of adults in developing countries can now read and write, and 90 per cent of children in these countries attend school.

48. Improving literacy for women - Programmes aimed at promoting education and advancement for women helped raise the female literacy rate in developing countries from 36 per cent in 1970 to 56 per cent in 1990.

49. Safeguarding and preserving historic cultural and architectural sites - Ancient monuments in 81 countries including Greece, Egypt, Italy, Indonesia and Cambodia, have been protected through the efforts of UNESCO, and international conventions have been adopted to preserve cultural property.

50. Facilitating academic and cultural exchanges - The United Nations, through UNESCO and the United Nations University (UNU), have encouraged scholarly and scientific cooperation, networking of institutions and promotion of cultural expressions, including those of minorities and indigenous people.
As an interesting fruther note:
The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded five times to the United Nations and its organizations

1954
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, for its assistance to refugees

1965
United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), for its work in helping save lives of the world's children

1969
International Labour Organisation (ILO), Geneva, for its progress in establishing workers' rights and protections

1981
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, for its assistance to Asian refugees

1988
United Nations Peace-keeping Forces, for its peace-keeping operations

The Prize was also awarded to:

1945
Cordell Hull, U.S., ex-Secretary of State, for his leadership in establishing the UN

1949
Lord John Boyd Orr, United Kingdom, first Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

1950
Ralph Bunche, U.S., UN Mediator in Palestine (1948), for his leadership in the armistice agreements signed in 1949 by Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria

1957
Lester Pearson, Canada, ex-Secretary of State, President, 7th Session of the UN General Assembly, for a lifetime of work for peace and for leading UN efforts to resolve the Suez Canal crisis

1961
Dag Hammarskjöld, Sweden, Secretary-General of the UN, for his work in helping settle the Congo crisis

1974
Sean MacBride, Ireland, UN Commissioner for Namibia Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, for its assistance to European refugees
[65 Storm Warden] Archeiron Leafstalker (Wood Elf) <Sovereign>RETIRED
vn_Tanc
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2398
Joined: July 12, 2002, 12:32 pm
Location: UK

Post by vn_Tanc »

You can't just pick and choose veto-holding UN members. They chose themselves by being nuclear powers (not originally I know but ISTR China not being a veto older til they got nukes). Nukes are still the ultimate veto in world politics.
Denying veto-power to a nuclear-capable country (with delivery systems capable of more than local range) is futile.
A man with a fork
In a world of soup
Image
User avatar
Atokal
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1369
Joined: July 4, 2002, 12:23 am

Post by Atokal »

Thanks for the propaganda page from the UN website.

FACT: The UN adopts, creates, espouses many wonderful ideals.
FACT: The UN is a toothless organization that is unwilling to support these wonderful ideals with the necessary resources and mandates to matter.

I am talking about the situation in many African countries where innocents are being slaughtered daily. The blue hatted peace keepers are generally led by countries that have a significant investment in these countries and really all they do is maintain the status quo.

Peacekeepers are a fucking joke when the rules of engagement are such that they can only fire if fired upon.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/ ... 08703/pg_1

The above link will illustrate the point most clearly. The UN is a fucking joke.
Atokal
If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared.
Niccolo Machiavelli
vn_Tanc
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2398
Joined: July 12, 2002, 12:32 pm
Location: UK

Post by vn_Tanc »

The blue hatted peace keepers are generally led by countries that have a significant investment in these countries and really all they do is maintain the status quo
Because countries that don't have an interest won't volunteer their own troops for peacekeeping duties.
The UN is a talking shop and an umbrella organisation. I don't understand this vitriol against it as though it has any kind of autonomy. It's as much as its members make it to be. My bet is that the corruption and self-interest affect every member country to some extent or another.
My dislike of the US's stance on the UN is the double standard of using it when they see fit and ignoring it (and villifying it) when they don't.
Hamstringing the UN is exactly the kind of thing those PNAC/Neocon fuckers would have in mind though. File under "to be replaced. by us".
A man with a fork
In a world of soup
Image
User avatar
Atokal
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1369
Joined: July 4, 2002, 12:23 am

Post by Atokal »

vn_Tanc wrote:
The blue hatted peace keepers are generally led by countries that have a significant investment in these countries and really all they do is maintain the status quo
Because countries that don't have an interest won't volunteer their own troops for peacekeeping duties.
The UN is a talking shop and an umbrella organisation. I don't understand this vitriol against it as though it has any kind of autonomy. It's as much as its members make it to be. My bet is that the corruption and self-interest affect every member country to some extent or another.
My dislike of the US's stance on the UN is the double standard of using it when they see fit and ignoring it (and villifying it) when they don't.
Hamstringing the UN is exactly the kind of thing those PNAC/Neocon fuckers would have in mind though. File under "to be replaced. by us".
I agree with your assessment. Including the criticism of the US. What alternatives are there? The UN has done a masterful job of hamstringing itself historically.
Atokal
If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared.
Niccolo Machiavelli
User avatar
archeiron
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1289
Joined: April 14, 2003, 5:39 am

Post by archeiron »

Atokal wrote:Thanks for the propaganda page from the UN website.

FACT: The UN adopts, creates, espouses many wonderful ideals.
FACT: The UN is a toothless organization that is unwilling to support these wonderful ideals with the necessary resources and mandates to matter.
You are labelling your two main points as facts that clearly contain purely subjective points: "wonderful ideas" cannot be fact, "necessary resources", and "toothless organization" aren't facts. You have discarded information from the UN website, which could easily be referenced through news sites, as subjective propaganda. And to top the argument off, you began your counter-point with "facts" that aren't even remotely factual. This is counter-intuitive to the point of being nearly incomprehensible.

If you want to dismiss the points marked on the UN site, site reference material that shows how the points made are factual inaccurate.

I won't bother arguing details with you because I see that you don't like the UN and are not likely to be persuaded otherwise, assuming I was even disposed to argue that the UN is "good", but I do take issue with you labelling your opinions as facts.
Last edited by archeiron on January 6, 2005, 12:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[65 Storm Warden] Archeiron Leafstalker (Wood Elf) <Sovereign>RETIRED
User avatar
Fash
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4147
Joined: July 10, 2002, 2:26 am
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: sylblaydis
Location: A Secure Location

Post by Fash »

I just heard on FNC on the drive into work that this Core Group has been dissolved and the UN is in charge.
Fash

--
Naivety is dangerous.
Post Reply