Quote:
Originally posted by RawAlex@Mar 17 2003, 01:44 PM
This is the most important test ever of the UN, because the major powers attempted to use the UN for what it was suppose to be for, and it failed completely.
|
But this has happened quite a few times since the UN was formed. In fact, this is typical, not atypical.
Consider ...
UN failed to resolve Korean conflict.
UN failed to resolve Hungary
Un failed to resolve Afghanistan.
Which is worse?
A. The security council asking a permanent member to withdraw troops and that member ignoring it.
OR ...
B. A security council member asking for assistance in affecting a regime change and not getting the vote.
A is much worse. In one case, a security council member is ordered to do something and ignores it (vetoes it actually). In the other, a security council member asks for help in doing something and is denied. A is USSR/Hungary. B is US/UK/Iraq
Everything always gets blown out of proportion because everyone has short memories. A few hot words that will blow over just like every other time - just in time for everyone to get in on the rebuilding Iraq thing.
The UN has NEVER been very good at conflict resolution. It still isn't. It is more effective in other capacities and we can be sure it will continue on in those capacities. Most notably, the UN will be all over the rebuilding of Iraq. Russia says they want to be involved. France says they want to be involved.
You can't hold it to a standard it has never had in practice.