Surprise! Bush can't win for losing
By Walt Posted in Elections — Comments (6) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
According to The Scotsman, British International Development Secretary Clare Short has announced that President Bush's tsunami-relief coalition of four nations--the U.S., India, Japan, and Australia--is really "another attempt to undermine the UN when it is the best system we have got and the one that needs building up."
Continue reading.
She goes on to say, "Only really the UN can do that job. . . . It is the only body that has the moral authority. But it can only do it well if it is backed up by the authority of the great powers."
Shocking to no one is her opinion that the U.S. is "very bad at coordinating with anyone." On the other hand, her comments implying that India is unable to make decisions on how to deal with its own tragedy are surprising--at least to me.
Now, I think she might have a point if she was solely remarking on the inefficiency of having two or more organizations overseeing tsunami relief. But she had to mention the inability of the U.S. to coordinate with anyone.
Just to speak truth to power, and to remind those who have possibly forgotten: didn't the U.N. "coordinate" the oil-for-food program? If I understand correctly, the U.N. allowed various trustees and overseers to "coordinate" away Iraqi assets. And the U.N. was backed by the "great powers" the whole time.
So, maybe policy makers are justified in believing that the U.N. is not the best administrator of resources. Which is a shame, because the U.N. should be exactly what Clare Short wants it be, and apparently believes it to be: the best organization to organize the world's response to disasters.
« Question and answer time: the Wes Clark thing. — Comments (50) | American bounty — Comments (53) »
Surprise! Bush can't win for losing 6 Comments (0 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
What to think of Colin Powell videoconferencing with Kofi and "allowing" the UN to join the four Nation coalition? I really do not trust the UN near a couple of hundred million dollars, but maybe this will take some of the wind out of the anti-American crowd, yet still let the President lead without interference. It remails to be seen.
an article worthy of Scrappleface.
What you have here is a snitfit over the UN being out of the loop of looting the relief monies to their hearts content.
I bet Kofi's son is particularly piqued.
Clare Short resigned from Tony Blair's cabinet over the latter's support for Bush and participation in Iraq. Needless to say, she's a garden-variety, Americaphobic Bush-hater, and as such has zero credibility on anything to do with the policies of the United States government.
the way we're still talking about the U.N. as though its us versus them (as it often is!) Its a shame to me because the very name of the organization would imply a cooperation of US and other nations to achieve a common good.
Any organization that recognizes countries like Syria as having a credible international voice is destined for American contempt, but it makes me sad that we (the US and UN) can't put differences aside for a matter such as the tsunami crisis.
Consider that many of the effected countries are Muslim cultures. I'd wager that having the most international face possible for aid collaboration would benefit all nations involved in the relief effort. We could say: "see the world is united behind Muslims in need AND united against terror", yet the divisive posturing and lack of cooperation continues. If there's still bad feelings over Iraq I wish they would be transcended, because this sudden need is so much bigger then politics.
It would be great if we actually could "put differences aside" to work with the UN for tsunami relief. But Kofi et al have demonstrated beyond any doubt that they should be kept as far from any funds as possible. We want the relief funds to actually make it to Asia, to be spent on actual relief. If Kofi and Kojo were allowed anywhere near those funds, it would wind up lining their pockets, just like the "Oil for Food" money.
I would be ecstatic to see the UN pick up and move to Paris, without the US. I think that the League of Democracies idea that has been floating around could be far superior to what we have now.Perhaps the president's tsunami relief caolition could be the seed for just such an organization.
that the UN should be the organization that we trust, rely on, and work through in international tragedies such as this, their track record makes it clear we cannot. And what is more important, they are showing no indication whatsoever of acknowledging their failures, which would of course be a necessary first step towards correction.
Until such acknowledgement occurs, I frankly think that they ought to have as little responsibility in such matters as possible. This is not a time for hand-holding. We have hundreds of thousands (likely) dead, and millions sick, hungry, and homeless. They cannot afford to wait for the trainee to come to speed.