Saturday, September 24, 2016

Is The United Nations Helpless In The New World order?

UN General Assembly. Wikipedia

Ines Pohl, DW: The UN is helpless in the new world order

The United Nations is at its wits' end. The organization's structures have proven themselves to be outdated. They no longer function in a world where conflicts don't happen along borders anymore, where it's not about ideological domination or winning new territory. With the verbal attacks by US Secretary of State John Kerry against his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, the world now has video evidence: the bureaucratic mega-agency has no idea how it can help the Syrian people.

The bombing of an aid convoy that should have brought relief to thousands of people is the dreadful proof that all the negotiating and political wrangling has been in vain. People are still dying – day and night. They are dying now, as you read this sentence.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The author of the above post may be right .... that the UN is helpless to confront the problems of the world today .... but for now the United Nations is the only thing that we got, and we have to work with it .... warts and all. On a personal note .... for those who may not know .... I worked for the UN for a number of years. First at ICAO in Montreal .... and now .... like this week in New York city .... doing translation during the General Assembly. I have seen a lot of interesting things over the years .... good and bad .... but I have learned an undeniable truth. Mankind does need a place where different governments, organisations, peoples and cultures can meet, discuss, and develop a consensus on important issues. And while agreement has always been difficult to achieve within an organisation like the UN .... it sometimes happen .... and that alone is worth the cost of keeping the lights on and the doors open.


RRH said...

Sadly, the UN is so compromised that soon we may see it go the way of the League of Nations.

Young Communist said...

I think that is better for the future of the UN to leave from a place so compromised like the U.S. territory.

A neutral state is a more better place for their assembly and offices.

Noble Bloodsworth said...

Young Redski, if you were a Bosnian Muslim in Srebrenica, or a Tutsi in Rwanda who would you rather have come save you, the UN or NATO?

Aizino Smith said...

I vote for putting the UN in Bermuda.

That would be unfair to Bermudans

We could make an artificial island in the middle of the Atlantic

We could call it the save NYC project.

Aizino Smith said...

NATO is no good if you have a handwringing, skirt chasing, lecther like Bill Clinton as president.

On Rwanda
"Someone should have done something" -Bubba Clinton

"You were president Mr. Clinton" - Honest News Reporter.

"Derp!" - Bubba Clinton.

5 minutes later.

"Someone should have done something" -Bubba Clinton

Anonymous said...

Dear Editor:

You are a translator for the UN, hobnob with embassy/government personnel from around the world (and tell us what they tell you...hope that they are safe),international business person, have property and maybe business interests in Russia, and have two properties in Quebec. You have been a minor official for the Russian government.

I am an astronaut. See you at the UN when I return from space.

War News Updates Editor said...

I actually have 3 properties in Quebec.

Jay Farquharson said...

WNU Editior,

Reality is of no concern for many.