From: Rick Rozoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Visit our website: HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------------------------

The Hindustan Times
October 15, 2001

"After the end of the Cold War, when the UN might have
been have been expected to come into its own, the US
insured that only its dictates would prevail. Not only
did Washington see to it that an 'inconvenient'
secretary-general like Boutros Boutros-Ghali would be
denied a second term, but only someone who is
perceived to be more accomodating would gain this
post."


Uneasy peace over Nobel
 
The Nobel Committee seems hell-bent on courting
controversy. To compound its choice of V.S. Naipaul, a
virulent critic of Islam, for the Nobel prize for
literature at a time when the Muslim world is in a
turmoil over the war in Afghanistan, the committee has
given the peace prize to the United Nations and its
Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

There have been other controversial recipients like
Henry Kissinger in 1973 and Yasser Arafat, along with
Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin, in 1994. But in both
these cases, the significance of their role in trying
to resolve the Vietnam and Israeli-Palestinian
conflicts could not be denied. It isn?t that the UN is
entirely without any notable achievement. Among other
places, it made a crucial contribution towards
bringing peace to Kampuchea and was involved in
peace-keeping operations in Haiti and Somalia. Many of
its allied organisations have been making
contributions to alleviate the misery of the
underprivileged and displaced people.

Unfortunately, however, achievements such as these
have tended to be overshadowed by two unflattering
perceptions about the UN. During the Cold War, it was
perceived to be deadlocked since the veto powers of
the two superpowers ? the US and the USSR ? ensured
that it could not take a major initiative in any
field. As a result, it wasn?t deemed to be any more
effective than its predecessor, the League of Nations.
After the end of the Cold War, when the UN might have
been expected to come into its own, the US ensured
that only its dictates would prevail. Not only did
Washington see to it that an ?inconvenient?
secretary-general like Boutros Boutros-Ghali would be
denied a second term, but only someone who is
perceived to be more accommodating would gain this
post. 

In the process, the UN has lost so much of its lustre
that few seem to be taking it seriously. It singularly
failed in resolving the Balkan crisis. The US no
longer bothers to consult it while carrying out air
raids on Iraq and even Mr Annan recently voiced his
displeasure when the US announced that it might extend
the present war against terrorism. Arguably,
situations like these reflect the world as it is, and
not an ideal state in which the UN will be regarded as
the conscience-keeper of the international community
and have a dominant say in the conduct of world
affairs. It was actually with such a hope in mind that
the UN was set up, as was the League of Nations. But
these expectations have been belied. The Nobel prize,
therefore, is more in honour of the ideal of the UN
than of the present reality.
 


_________________________________________________
 
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki
Phone +358-40-7177941
Fax +358-9-7591081
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
 
General class struggle news:
 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
subscribe mails to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Geopolitical news:
 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________



Reply via email to