The Dishonor rollAt some time the return on investment in the UN is negative (aren't we there already?) and the thing should be let die, to be replaced by something better.
• Failing to enforce 17 resolutions against Saddam, tolerating his ejection of U.N. weapons inspectors, and even enabling him to stay in power by looking the other way as he exploited Oil for Food.
• Failing to use U.N. peacekeepers already in place to stop the Rwanda genocide in 1994, and, worse,
handing overthousands of Bosnian Muslim men for slaughter by the Serbs at Srebrenica in 1995.
• Failing to act in Kosovo in 1999, amid the threat of a Russian veto, leaving NATO the task of preventing a bloody civil war on European soil.
• As recently as this year, failing to stop the massacre of African Muslims in Sudan's Darfur province.
• And failing even to bring up for formal debate, let alone action, North Korean and Iranian violations of non-proliferation agreements.
We could go on, but the point is that anyone who wants to solve a global problem knows not to take it to the U.N. The French jumped into the Ivory Coast on their own, asking the Security Council for its blessing only after the fact. Rather than facilitate "coalitions of the willing," the Council with its vetoes has become a body that thwarts them. We suspect the Security Council is now beyond saving, since the French and Russians are hardly going to give up their veto prerogatives, however outdated in terms of their ebbing global clout.
Tuesday, December 07, 2004
OpinionJournal - Featured Article. Another stab at the Useless Nitwits. In this day and age, any organization that is NOT willing to denouce terrorism should be disowned. Not only has the UN not denounced terrorism (the anti-Israel lobby loves the terrorists), but it has been unable to stop human rights abuses (and has even been responsible for a few itself).