Thursday, March 17, 2011

WHO WILL BE THE BRAVE MEN OF THE WORLD WHO WILL CALL FOR THE COLLAPSE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

– A WORLD ORGANIZATION WHICH HAS CREATED MORE EMNITY THAN PEACE, AND BROUGHT HELL TO THE PALESTINIANS, ARABS AND OTHER MUSLIMS IN THE WORLD?
By Mansor Puteh


If the Muslim World cannot have a permanent membership status in the United Nations (UN) Security Council, it only proves that the UN and those countries which have been using it to their fullest benefits, really do not want the Muslims in the world to be accorded respect; they are only to be bullied.

It is so easy for the secretary-general of the UN Ban Ki-moon to say again and again in his thick Korean accent that the people have the right to protest and assembly.

It is indeed annoying to listen to an old record being played again and again. And the more he says it, the more he sounds like a joker.

Even Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck speak better English and sound better in it than Ban. 

Nobody respects the office of the secretary-general of the UN anyway; many see him as a lackey for America and the other permanent members of the Security Council.

The other countries are in the organization not as members but as sidekicks; they have trusted the UN for too long, so it becomes a habit for them to be given a few minutes to say with their leaders who are able to say more, and all of which do not matter as decisions have all been made far in advance, with the secretary-general leading the pack with his ‘pre-recorded’ messages.

And this happens as the world becomes more fractured with those countries which are backward being stuck there and the already developed ones enjoying greater dividends.

The UN thus becomes to many, their public relations office.

Will Ban say the same if the protestors turn around and shout abuses at him and his UN organization instead?

This can happen if there are some brave men who can call for the reshaping of the UN, so that it serves not a few powerful and ridiculous nations, but one and all of them, by protecting the interests of all and not just a few?

One does not expect and hope for some to burn themselves to light the fire of dissent against the UN although Ban and American president Barack Obama have not condemned such acts.

The UN has been in such a slaggard state for too long as it has become stale.

That the UN is now irrelevant that it ever was is not an understatement; it is an inconvenient fact. It serve only so few countries with the others suffering in their hands.

It needs to be replaced by another organization, as its secretary-general and members of the Security Council and especially its six permanent members are sounding like they are playing an old record again and again.

As a result the discourses in the general assembly are not case specific.

This proves that international diplomacy has become rusty; it therefore needs to be redesigned and to make it suit the new times we are in today.

But it will be useful if there is someone who can call their bluff; that they are not the beacon of democracy and fairplay in the world anymore. It is inherently biased.

Maybe the UN does not know what democracy or fairplay is all about because they had not exhibited such values, ever.

Small countries are trampled and their interests are not being taken care of.

Arab and Muslim countries too suffer from the biases of the UN whose policies and attitudes do not seem to be relevant in these times.

They have failed the world.

Therefore the world body ought to be given a shake-up so new ways can be found to make them relevant so they can and must be seen to be fair to all.

The UN takes immediate and swift action on the meek, but is frightened of the brash with its secretary-general behaving and sounding like a puppet.

It will be a new day if there are demonstrations by peace-loving people who converge in front of the UN headquarters in New York City and the offices of their other agencies anywhere in the world.

So they know that what they say about allowing for peaceful assemblies are, when they are the receiving end of the deal.

So far the UN has been allowed to on with their job of confusing the world without anyone daring to bring them to task.

But isn’t this dictatorship? Isn’t it also not democratic?

Who says the UN is democratic? It does not look like they promote such principles unless if they disband the group of six permanent members in the security council and do away with their veto power which is too communistic for any sane person to believe and accept.

Arab and Muslim countries must now allow the UN to bully them and to be used by some of the nations who have veto power to use it for their personal gain.

The talk about how the UN has brought peace in the world since it was first conceived is just a misnomer.

It has done the direct opposite.

In fact, it could also be one of the major reasons why Africa, South America, most of Asia and many Muslim countries are still backward.

If there are some lucky Muslim countries which could develop, it was because they are parasites of the developed countries in the west as can be seen in the way their citizens behave.




No comments: