UN involvement

A while back, many months ago, I linked to an argument for the U.S. to dump the United Nations and form a separate League of Democracies.  At the time I thought that the UN would still have a function in the world, and so it would.  However, it seems that the arguments for creating some sort of world body representing Democracies gets stronger and stronger over time.  As a forum for all the worlds nations to hash treaties out and talk things over, the UN does a fairly good job.  However, as a peace keeping body, the UN leaves a lot to be desired.

The U.N. failure on this score is no accident. It is a direct result of what the U.N. is, and how it works - a collective, saddled with procedures that tend to favor despots over democrats. In the matter of coming up with a global definition of terrorism, the job falls to the General Assembly’s legal committee - the so-called Sixth Committee- which includes all 192 member states, and operates in practice by consensus. In that setting, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) - whose 57 members include such terror-linked states as Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran - has for years insisted that any definition of terrorism exempt the OIC’s pet terrorists. These the OIC would prefer to define - notes Comras - as "engaged in so-called ‘struggles against colonial domination and foreign occupation.’"

Sitting back watching while genocide happens right under their nose.  Allowing nations with severe human rights issues on the UN committee for human rights.  Corruption that allowed Saddam to maintain his lavish lifestyle and snub weapons inspectors.  Resolutions coming out of the Security Council are looking pretty limp right now.