Thursday, March 12, 2009

farmdoc's blog post number 326

I’ve previously written of my aversion to authority. Faced with an authoritarian person or institution, my initial response’s somewhere between scepticism and cynicism. The United Nations, founded in 1945 after World War II to stop future wars and promote dialogue, is arguably the only institution with global participation and authority. I’d love to believe in the UN, its ideals, and its activities which should transcend politics. But alas, I cannot. For example following the 2006 Second Lebanon War, the Security Council, in Resolution 1701 (2006) ‘created a buffer zone free of “any armed personnel” – both Hizbollah militants and Israeli troops – between the United Nations-drawn Blue Line in southern Lebanon and the Litani River’. This hasn’t occurred; Hizbollah’s re-armed under the very nose of UNIFIL. And in Gaza UNRWA openly collaborates with Hamas: its workers aren’t security screened; they double as Hamas combatants; Hamas uses its refugee camps and schools as training bases and missile launch-sites; and as UNRWA’s attempt to transfer a letter from Hamas to US Senator John Kerry during his recent visit to Gaza demonstrated, UNRWA’s also willing to be Hamas’s surrogate. And what about UNRWA’s deliberately false claim during Operation Cast Lead, of Israel shelling its school, killing dozens. The moral? The UN’s not apolitical, not disinterested, not principled and not trustworthy. It may have been a great idea once. But no longer. More’s the pity.

2 comments:

OldProle said...

I don't deal well with authority either, and have been fired from a number of jobs for questioning the authority of one boss or another. I like to think of myself as an anarchist (but I haven't systematized this thinking). I understand how disappointing institutions can be when it comes to real politics. What kind of organization do you think COULD achieve an all round fair and just settlement among the countries of the Levant (Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Syria)? The region has been so thoroughly fucked over (by the Ottomans, then the British and the French, then by each other) and my country - USA - is hardly guiltless of being one of the agents of middle-east fucked-up-edness. If there is no organization that can be trusted in any way, to any extent, where does that leave you? (I mean, if you really can't trust any institution how do you continue to operate in the world?) I don't think the Obama administration will bring heaven to earth, but would it make sense to say that they can't be trusted if they get one or two things wrong, and get hundreds of things right? As individuals we are, unfortunately, the very models of human fallibility, aren't we? So why do we expect other people to be perfect?

mikejanarch@yahoo.com

farmdoc said...

Thank you for your thoughtful comment, OldProle. In relation to which organisation 'could achieve an all round fair and just settlement among the countries of the Levant', I'm hopeful the Obama administration will achieve more than its predecessors have done. And I'm almost certain it'll achieve more than the UN has done - because it doesn't have much to beat, does it. Time will tell.