Despite George Galloway, Tony Blair Moves Forward
Tony Blair, British Prime Minister, has decided to embark on another historic undertaking. And it is one that is similar to our own. According to Captain Ed and the New York Sun Prime Minister Blair is about to throw down the gauntlet to the UN: Reform, or become irrelevant in the free world's eyes:
Prime Minister Blair, whose close friendship with President Bush was forged in the heat of the war on terror, on Friday will urge radical reform of the United Nations, the culmination of that other great Anglo-American war partnership, between President Franklin Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill.
Mr. Blair will argue that the various world institutions, set up 60 years ago to better facilitate a peaceful resolution of conflicts between states, are no longer suited to the present world's needs. He will question the role and membership of the Security Council and will plead for a major overhaul of the council to rehabilitate the United Nations in the eyes of the world.
He will tell an audience at Georgetown University that the lofty ideals that inspired Roosevelt and Churchill to set up the United Nations at the end of World War II are being betrayed today by small-mindedness, narrow national interests, irrelevant politicking, and corruption. The much-touted "reform" of the world body suggested by Secretary-General Annan has made minimal progress, yet until true reform is carried out, the United Nations will remain a mere talking shop with little influence and no power.
Mr. Blair has turned to U.N. reform - and the reform of world bodies like the International Monetary Fund and the G8 - because he feels it is time for America and Britain to move beyond the war in Iraq, a country he has said has been transformed by the democratic elections and Prime Minister Maliki's coalition government of many faiths that has followed. ...
... "We don't want a conflict with Iran," he said. "We have got enough on our plate doing other things. But if Iran goes out of its way then to breach its international obligations, of course the international community, through the U.N. Security Council, has got to take up the issue."
In Friday's speech, Mr. Blair will say it is time the world's governments faced up to the fact that the world bodies founded in the aftermath of World War II have become moribund and ineffective. Whereas 60 years ago the world was divided into nation states that could operate more or less independently of each other, now international leaders are confronting an ever diminishing world brought intimately together by globalization, a technological revolution that has led to revolutionary approaches to labor employment, and greater economic interdependence between states.
Yet the world bodies have not kept up with the economic and social progress of the last 60 years, Mr. Blair will say. A smaller world entailed sharing values such as extending the freedom of movement and freedom of information enjoyed by the West with the rest of the world. Above all, the democracy that some nations take for granted should be provided to those trapped beneath restrictive and repressive regimes.
Unlike some American conservatives, Mr. Blair has said he believes that world bodies like the United Nations have not only an important but a leading part still to play in extending freedom to the whole world. But if the United Nations is to take up this task, it must reform itself so that it becomes a body that inspires respect from the world because of the clarity and wisdom of its leadership.
Mr. Blair will demand that Mr. Annan, who retires in the fall, be replaced by a strong successor, who should be granted greater independence from the General Assembly in appointing staff and in intervening in world crises.
The world bodies should be made more transparent in the way they operate and more representative as well, he will say, but they also must be prepared to reflect a greater political will to take on hard issues and not duck them. He will cite as an example the need to make the G8 more representative, transforming it from a small Western club into a body routinely including nations with emerging economies.
In our opinion as long as the UN continues down it's corrupted path, there will be no reform. There will continue to be misery and despotism in a world that has grown tired of conflict. The Oil-For-Food scandal was the curtain torn away at the end of the Wizard of Oz to reveal nothing more than a man, and not some all-powerful wizard. The world has watched as the UN makes empty promises and non-binding resolutions. The common joke amongst conservatives when it comes to the UN dealing with dictatorships like Saddam's Iraq and Ahmadinejad's Iran is "Stop, or I'll say stop again ... Okay, you have forced us to send you a strongly-worded letter."
As of right now, the UN is a joke. That does not mean that there are not humanitarian causes that they do work towards, but the embarrassing sex scandal in the Congo, the blind eye to the genocide in Rwanda, Zimbabwe, and Darfur are more examples of a world body that lacks the teeth to back up threats from the world community, or a lackadaisical attitude towards anyone other than those with power. And it seems, as Eric Shawn is indeed correct: Many UN bureaucrats will not move on true reform if it threatens their position, or their nation's standing, in the UN. (Thomas finished the book this past Tuesday, and I picked it up yesterday. It is quite the interesting and informative read, to say the least.)
The UN needs to recognize that this new century--even in its infant years--is one that will certainly be a challenge. Not only to mankind, but to the free world, as well. We live in a world right now that is at war, and it's war is with a blood-thirsty enemy that adheres to a system of beliefs dating back to the times of Mohammed. They hold onto this belief though a great majority of their brethren in Islam have turned away from those paths. It is the Islamofascists that are running the show, being the mouthpieces for that religion; for those people.
The UN has failed to recognize this. Their idea of tackling terrorism was to create a committee, and debate the issue to death. Even Kofi Annan admitted that the UN was incapable of addressing the issue. If the Secretary General is admitting there is a problem with the body, then it is time for a top-to-bottom reform. I have no idea what the reform would entail (I need to do more research on that particular subject and idea) but it must be comprehensive. I can give Congress a start on that reform by encouraging them to withhold money from the UN unless it is for humanitarian needs. We give the UN more money than any other nation, and we watch it disappear into a bureaucracy that seems more and more content with just maintaining the status quo.
This will not do in the world we live in today. For the UN to truly be relevant, for it to truly be a representative of the free world, reform is the only solution. Prime Minister Blair and President Bush are right in pushing for such reform. The free world cannot wait on these petty bureaucrats to form a committee to investigate whether or not reform is needed. It is. And it is truly sad when the leaders of the free world recognize it, and the General Assembly and UN Security Council do not.
The Bunny ;)
Tony Blair, British Prime Minister, has decided to embark on another historic undertaking. And it is one that is similar to our own. According to Captain Ed and the New York Sun Prime Minister Blair is about to throw down the gauntlet to the UN: Reform, or become irrelevant in the free world's eyes:
Prime Minister Blair, whose close friendship with President Bush was forged in the heat of the war on terror, on Friday will urge radical reform of the United Nations, the culmination of that other great Anglo-American war partnership, between President Franklin Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill.
Mr. Blair will argue that the various world institutions, set up 60 years ago to better facilitate a peaceful resolution of conflicts between states, are no longer suited to the present world's needs. He will question the role and membership of the Security Council and will plead for a major overhaul of the council to rehabilitate the United Nations in the eyes of the world.
He will tell an audience at Georgetown University that the lofty ideals that inspired Roosevelt and Churchill to set up the United Nations at the end of World War II are being betrayed today by small-mindedness, narrow national interests, irrelevant politicking, and corruption. The much-touted "reform" of the world body suggested by Secretary-General Annan has made minimal progress, yet until true reform is carried out, the United Nations will remain a mere talking shop with little influence and no power.
Mr. Blair has turned to U.N. reform - and the reform of world bodies like the International Monetary Fund and the G8 - because he feels it is time for America and Britain to move beyond the war in Iraq, a country he has said has been transformed by the democratic elections and Prime Minister Maliki's coalition government of many faiths that has followed. ...
... "We don't want a conflict with Iran," he said. "We have got enough on our plate doing other things. But if Iran goes out of its way then to breach its international obligations, of course the international community, through the U.N. Security Council, has got to take up the issue."
In Friday's speech, Mr. Blair will say it is time the world's governments faced up to the fact that the world bodies founded in the aftermath of World War II have become moribund and ineffective. Whereas 60 years ago the world was divided into nation states that could operate more or less independently of each other, now international leaders are confronting an ever diminishing world brought intimately together by globalization, a technological revolution that has led to revolutionary approaches to labor employment, and greater economic interdependence between states.
Yet the world bodies have not kept up with the economic and social progress of the last 60 years, Mr. Blair will say. A smaller world entailed sharing values such as extending the freedom of movement and freedom of information enjoyed by the West with the rest of the world. Above all, the democracy that some nations take for granted should be provided to those trapped beneath restrictive and repressive regimes.
Unlike some American conservatives, Mr. Blair has said he believes that world bodies like the United Nations have not only an important but a leading part still to play in extending freedom to the whole world. But if the United Nations is to take up this task, it must reform itself so that it becomes a body that inspires respect from the world because of the clarity and wisdom of its leadership.
Mr. Blair will demand that Mr. Annan, who retires in the fall, be replaced by a strong successor, who should be granted greater independence from the General Assembly in appointing staff and in intervening in world crises.
The world bodies should be made more transparent in the way they operate and more representative as well, he will say, but they also must be prepared to reflect a greater political will to take on hard issues and not duck them. He will cite as an example the need to make the G8 more representative, transforming it from a small Western club into a body routinely including nations with emerging economies.
In our opinion as long as the UN continues down it's corrupted path, there will be no reform. There will continue to be misery and despotism in a world that has grown tired of conflict. The Oil-For-Food scandal was the curtain torn away at the end of the Wizard of Oz to reveal nothing more than a man, and not some all-powerful wizard. The world has watched as the UN makes empty promises and non-binding resolutions. The common joke amongst conservatives when it comes to the UN dealing with dictatorships like Saddam's Iraq and Ahmadinejad's Iran is "Stop, or I'll say stop again ... Okay, you have forced us to send you a strongly-worded letter."
As of right now, the UN is a joke. That does not mean that there are not humanitarian causes that they do work towards, but the embarrassing sex scandal in the Congo, the blind eye to the genocide in Rwanda, Zimbabwe, and Darfur are more examples of a world body that lacks the teeth to back up threats from the world community, or a lackadaisical attitude towards anyone other than those with power. And it seems, as Eric Shawn is indeed correct: Many UN bureaucrats will not move on true reform if it threatens their position, or their nation's standing, in the UN. (Thomas finished the book this past Tuesday, and I picked it up yesterday. It is quite the interesting and informative read, to say the least.)
The UN needs to recognize that this new century--even in its infant years--is one that will certainly be a challenge. Not only to mankind, but to the free world, as well. We live in a world right now that is at war, and it's war is with a blood-thirsty enemy that adheres to a system of beliefs dating back to the times of Mohammed. They hold onto this belief though a great majority of their brethren in Islam have turned away from those paths. It is the Islamofascists that are running the show, being the mouthpieces for that religion; for those people.
The UN has failed to recognize this. Their idea of tackling terrorism was to create a committee, and debate the issue to death. Even Kofi Annan admitted that the UN was incapable of addressing the issue. If the Secretary General is admitting there is a problem with the body, then it is time for a top-to-bottom reform. I have no idea what the reform would entail (I need to do more research on that particular subject and idea) but it must be comprehensive. I can give Congress a start on that reform by encouraging them to withhold money from the UN unless it is for humanitarian needs. We give the UN more money than any other nation, and we watch it disappear into a bureaucracy that seems more and more content with just maintaining the status quo.
This will not do in the world we live in today. For the UN to truly be relevant, for it to truly be a representative of the free world, reform is the only solution. Prime Minister Blair and President Bush are right in pushing for such reform. The free world cannot wait on these petty bureaucrats to form a committee to investigate whether or not reform is needed. It is. And it is truly sad when the leaders of the free world recognize it, and the General Assembly and UN Security Council do not.
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 11:18 AM
1 Comments:
It was in the middle of the 1970s that the late Daniel Moynihan entered and exited as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Upon his leaving he gave three definitions of that organization: "A theater of the absurd, a decomposing corpse, and an insane asylum." Then, giving his remarks support, he quoted a leading British journalist of the time who said that the U.N. was among "the most corrupt and corrupting creations in the whole history of human institutions."
The UN has only gotten worse. Rawriter
Post a Comment
<< Home