UN Hq to Jerusalem

[Peter Dybwad]

After we’ve dealt with bin Laden,
Why not move the UN Headquarters to Jerusalem

I want to encourage people to consider the benefits (and liabilities) of
having the Headquarters of the United Nations be in Jerusalem.  In
conjunction with this, the UN, through the Security Council, would provide
and oversee the security for the key parts of the city – the parts that
the Christians, Jews, and Muslims have fought over for the past two
thousand years.  The UN itself could be on "international land."  

If we solve the problem of Jerusalem, we make much easier the solution of
the problem of Israel and the Palestinians.  This problem is the need to
provide a homeland, i.e., nation state, for two peoples who have
long-term, legitimate, claims to the same land.

If the United Nations is in Jerusalem, all member nations will have a
vital interest in seeing to it that there is peace in the area.  The
members and leaders of major world religions/cultures will have a keen
interest in supporting political peace and stability in Jerusalem and the
surrounding area. In essence the world will guarantee Israel’s security by
placing their diplomats between Israel and the countries it fears.   If
Israel feels secure, then it can allow the Palestinians to have a fully
sovereign state of their own.  

What does this have to do with bin Laden?  I assume that bin Laden, the
Taliban, and other terror sponsors will be brought to justice for their
evil acts. 

I also assume that even if we rid the world of bin Laden and many of his
followers, we will still need all nations, particularly the countries in
the Islamic world, to take the necessary steps to prevent terrorists from
operating from within their borders.  (It’s not just Islamic countries,
though; in the 1970’s it was Germany, Italy, and Japan that were "homes"
for terrorists.)  We need the rest of the world to work with us to
identify and lock up any future bin Ladens.

It’s unrealistic to expect nations to take serious action against their
own citizens or even visitors if large numbers of people in the country
believe in the underlying "cause" that the terrorists claim to be
supporting.  The governments will looks the other way – and not act.  They
may talk the talk, but they won’t walk the walk.

In the Islamic world there is a lot of resentment about peoples’
circumstances compared to those of Europe/USA, and great popular
resentment about the imbalance of power between Israel and the
Palestinians.  In forty years of trying, we have not been able to change
that view.  

I assume that we will not abandon Israel’s right to exist in order to
placate present and potential terrorists.  But by the same token we can’t
expect the Muslim world to abandon the Palestinians.  

We may not be able to solve the problem of resentment about the good
circumstances the West has achieved; but we can take action to end the
festering wound that is the situation between Israel and the Palestinians;
and we can try to build bridges to the other peoples, cultures and
governments in the rest of the world.  Our willingness to allow the UN
headquarters to move out of the USA and to the Middle East also serves as
a sign of respect to the Islamic world, as well as to Asia, Africa and
South America.  It will create a significant doorway through which the
rest of the world and Europe/USA can seek more common ground. 

There are significant economic costs involved in moving the UN to
Jerusalem – but we’re preparing to spend billions if not trillions to deal
with the variety of future threats of terrorism.  Spending a percentage of
that to eliminate a source of terrorism’s appeal should be considered.