scoone
03-05-2004, 07:19 AM
Just Say No to the UN
by Thomas Kilgannon
September 15, 2003
Dulles, Virginia – Liberals and the media are gleeful that the President, as they see it, has been forced to eat crow and prostrate himself before the international community – finally admitting that he needs help defeating terrorists and rebuilding Iraq. These same critics anticipate their heroes at the United Nations will soon wield political and economic, if not military, control over post-war Iraq. The sooner we hand over the mantle of authority to Kofi Annan, they believe, the better.
French and German leaders have dug in their heels demanding that we give the UN more authority. For French President Jacques Chirac, it’s part of a broader quest to strengthen international institutions like the United Nations and the European Union so they may challenge the United States’ global influence. But while the Bush administration has invited the UN and its member states to help, it is still reluctant to give Kofi Annan the key to the city in Baghdad – and rightfully so.
In fact, the administration’s so-called policy shift is not as ****ounced as the media and the liberals think. Months ago, the Bush administration asked the United Nations to help rebuild post-war Iraq and requested personnel and financial assistance from France, Germany, Russia and others countries. The administration also asked Kofi Annan to encourage leaders of member nations around the world to help in Iraq and defeat the terrorist threat – a concern for every nation.
The question we should be asking is not, “Why has the administration finally turned to the UN for help?” but “Why must we beg the UN and its member nations to help fight terrorism?” Further, why does Kofi Annan insist that the UN be given power and authority in Iraq before it will help rebuild the country and aid Iraqi citizens?
President Bush is right. Members of the United Nations do have a “responsibility” to “assume a broader role” in Iraq. It is instructive to note that Mr. Bush distinguished between UN “members” – those countries that comprise the UN – and the professional UN bureaucracy run by Kofi Annan. Mr. Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell are right to, once again, invite individual nations to accept responsibility in the war on terror, but will be sorry if they give Kofi Annan’s UN bureaucracy any control or authority over post-war Iraq. Here’s why:
For the UN, it’s all about power. For the last year, Kofi Annan has been trying to undermine President Bush’s efforts to oust Saddam Hussein, declaring in September 2002, that “there is no substitute for the unique legitimacy provided by the United Nations.” Kofi made the statement in an unprecedented attempt to preempt Mr. Bush’s speech to the General Assembly. Throughout the debate in the Security Council leading up to the war in Iraq, and now in the rebuilding in Iraq, the UN bureaucrats have put their interests above Iraq’s people, demanding control over Iraq’s political and economic decisions before committing resources or urging member nations to do so.
The UN corrupted the Oil for Food program. The UN’s Oil for Food program was established in 1995 to provide the Iraqi people with food and medicine. Instead, under the UN’s “careful management,” Saddam was stealing billions from it to build his presidential palaces, and the UN was taking hundreds of millions more as “management fees.” It is believed that the UN still holds billions of dollars in “trust” although it is hard to know, since the UN will not open its books on the program.
The UN does not permit media scrutiny. In many ways, the UN is a secretive organization which bristles at criticism. It is not subject to a “Freedom of Information Act” like we have in the United States which would allow reporters or activists to examine records and documents of its activities. UN officials are less available to the press than U.S. public officials. The UN press corps is not as aggressive as U.S. reporters and media are less likely to engage in investigative journalism at the UN.
The UN does not take the terrorist threat seriously enough. The United Nations, in spite of its lip service, does not take terrorism seriously and underestimates the dangers of the terrorist threat. The institution puts terrorist nations on a par with peace loving democracies and refuses to condemn terrorism or terrorists. In fact, the UN has yet to agree on a definition of terrorism – largely because many UN member nations sponsor terrorism, support it financially, or turn a blind eye to it.
UN control would be an insult to U.S. military heroes. Nearly 300 U.S. military personnel – mostly soldiers and Marines – have been killed in Iraq, and hundreds more have been wounded. Their mission was to protect and defend the security of the United States and liberate the people of Iraq from a brutal dictator. They have carried out their responsibilities honorably. It would be an insult to allow their memories and contributions to be turned over to Kofi Annan’s management team.
Although the UN has resources it can contribute the cause, the institution is not equipped to rebuild Iraq or secure the nation. The media don’t understand that. Thankfully, it seems the President does, which is why he is not entrusting U.S. efforts in Iraq to Kofi Annan, and hopefully, never will.
by Thomas Kilgannon
September 15, 2003
Dulles, Virginia – Liberals and the media are gleeful that the President, as they see it, has been forced to eat crow and prostrate himself before the international community – finally admitting that he needs help defeating terrorists and rebuilding Iraq. These same critics anticipate their heroes at the United Nations will soon wield political and economic, if not military, control over post-war Iraq. The sooner we hand over the mantle of authority to Kofi Annan, they believe, the better.
French and German leaders have dug in their heels demanding that we give the UN more authority. For French President Jacques Chirac, it’s part of a broader quest to strengthen international institutions like the United Nations and the European Union so they may challenge the United States’ global influence. But while the Bush administration has invited the UN and its member states to help, it is still reluctant to give Kofi Annan the key to the city in Baghdad – and rightfully so.
In fact, the administration’s so-called policy shift is not as ****ounced as the media and the liberals think. Months ago, the Bush administration asked the United Nations to help rebuild post-war Iraq and requested personnel and financial assistance from France, Germany, Russia and others countries. The administration also asked Kofi Annan to encourage leaders of member nations around the world to help in Iraq and defeat the terrorist threat – a concern for every nation.
The question we should be asking is not, “Why has the administration finally turned to the UN for help?” but “Why must we beg the UN and its member nations to help fight terrorism?” Further, why does Kofi Annan insist that the UN be given power and authority in Iraq before it will help rebuild the country and aid Iraqi citizens?
President Bush is right. Members of the United Nations do have a “responsibility” to “assume a broader role” in Iraq. It is instructive to note that Mr. Bush distinguished between UN “members” – those countries that comprise the UN – and the professional UN bureaucracy run by Kofi Annan. Mr. Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell are right to, once again, invite individual nations to accept responsibility in the war on terror, but will be sorry if they give Kofi Annan’s UN bureaucracy any control or authority over post-war Iraq. Here’s why:
For the UN, it’s all about power. For the last year, Kofi Annan has been trying to undermine President Bush’s efforts to oust Saddam Hussein, declaring in September 2002, that “there is no substitute for the unique legitimacy provided by the United Nations.” Kofi made the statement in an unprecedented attempt to preempt Mr. Bush’s speech to the General Assembly. Throughout the debate in the Security Council leading up to the war in Iraq, and now in the rebuilding in Iraq, the UN bureaucrats have put their interests above Iraq’s people, demanding control over Iraq’s political and economic decisions before committing resources or urging member nations to do so.
The UN corrupted the Oil for Food program. The UN’s Oil for Food program was established in 1995 to provide the Iraqi people with food and medicine. Instead, under the UN’s “careful management,” Saddam was stealing billions from it to build his presidential palaces, and the UN was taking hundreds of millions more as “management fees.” It is believed that the UN still holds billions of dollars in “trust” although it is hard to know, since the UN will not open its books on the program.
The UN does not permit media scrutiny. In many ways, the UN is a secretive organization which bristles at criticism. It is not subject to a “Freedom of Information Act” like we have in the United States which would allow reporters or activists to examine records and documents of its activities. UN officials are less available to the press than U.S. public officials. The UN press corps is not as aggressive as U.S. reporters and media are less likely to engage in investigative journalism at the UN.
The UN does not take the terrorist threat seriously enough. The United Nations, in spite of its lip service, does not take terrorism seriously and underestimates the dangers of the terrorist threat. The institution puts terrorist nations on a par with peace loving democracies and refuses to condemn terrorism or terrorists. In fact, the UN has yet to agree on a definition of terrorism – largely because many UN member nations sponsor terrorism, support it financially, or turn a blind eye to it.
UN control would be an insult to U.S. military heroes. Nearly 300 U.S. military personnel – mostly soldiers and Marines – have been killed in Iraq, and hundreds more have been wounded. Their mission was to protect and defend the security of the United States and liberate the people of Iraq from a brutal dictator. They have carried out their responsibilities honorably. It would be an insult to allow their memories and contributions to be turned over to Kofi Annan’s management team.
Although the UN has resources it can contribute the cause, the institution is not equipped to rebuild Iraq or secure the nation. The media don’t understand that. Thankfully, it seems the President does, which is why he is not entrusting U.S. efforts in Iraq to Kofi Annan, and hopefully, never will.