While, for better or worse the UN is still 'The UN' d
Is it??
Some college buddies and I used to refer to it as the United Donations since it seems the only reasons certain nations participated was to obtain kickbacks for their corrupt leaders from the most prosperous states.
It is sad that in maintaining the current idealistic, ineffective framework of world conferderate gov't, that many corrupt acts either take place or are overlooked by the great powers because we have sacrificed our unilateral decision making in order to garner votes. Yet as a confederacy, the UN framework provides very little in enforcement capability for implementing, through force if necessary, a common standard of conduct.
The inherent conflict I see here is that in our everyday society we have police forces that sometimes rely upon force to maintain order or prevent crime. But since we have chosen to respect the soverignty of all nations (which I have no problem with), AND chosen not to act in a manner to target the problem individual (Milosevic in this case), we have limited the precision of our enforcement mechanisms and have had to resort to targeting him indirectly through the economic and political infrastructure.
That to me is tantamount to some corrupt, but locally popular, "mafia boss" in some city, by law, being given sanctuary in his bourough, and the police being forced to tear-gas or shoot-up the entire neighborhood until the residents kick him out and place him in the hands of the authorities.
Just doesn't seem to quite work too well. Maybe we need a UN equivalent of a "Star Chamber". <VBG>
Regards,
Ron
|
