NationStates Jolt Archive

(cross posted from A Far Cry Left (http://farcryleft.blogspot.com/))
The UN is using more force in the world (http://nytimes.com/2005/05/23/international/africa/23congo.html?ei=5094&en=0362405b74c9cc4c&hp=&ex=1116907200&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1116821536-Kb6R4jzX9iuILJsbXc7u/Q)

The UN, after decades of being strangled by the security council on matters of international peacekeeping, is finally growing some balls.

The operations, mainly taking place in Africe, have learned heavily from the UNs inability to do anything in Rwanda for years. The result is that the UN is using much more force in its peacekeeping operations. Soliders are invoking chapter (http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm) VII of the UN Charter - something that allows the UN peacekeepers to protect themselves with force. They are finally doing it.

Congo was a starting point, and now, with over 16,000 Peacekeepers (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/home.shtml), the UN is finally being effective. The soldiers are now getting the support of Mi-25 Attack Helicopters (http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/hind/specs.html), Tanks, APCs, Mortars, and RPGs.

Where the UN faced sniper attacks unable to answer before, they are now searching house to house at gunpoint, conducting night raids, and using attack helicopters to strafe forested streatches of suspected rebel hideouts.

An interesting fact - after the 1990s, most Western nations stopped contributing soldiers to the peacekeeping force. Only 45% of peacekeepers are now from Western Nations. The other 55% comes from the developing world.

The UN is now moving into a useful phase of its life. Instead of becoming more useless, the Security Council has been authorizing itself to use force in its peacekeeping situations. This could wuite actually be one of the most useful things the UN has ever done. Now, instead of having people watch slaughter, the UN can stop it. About time.

So, lets keep the US in the UN, lets contribute more troops, and lets start using our Security Council position to actually get something done instead of vetoing everything and then bitching.

If only the SC would stop being a council of dicks about Darfur. They have intentionally avoided labeling the crisis a "genocide," because if they do, then they are required by UN law to step in and help. All they've done is passed a resolution giving the ICC jurisdiction over Sudan war criminals, and the Sudan responded with a big "Fuck you, we're rejecting that shit." Without SC approval, all the rest of the UN can do is recommend and send humanitarian aid. Hopefully you're right, and the SC is finally growing some balls.

If only the SC would stop being a council of dicks about Darfur. They have intentionally avoided labeling the crisis a "genocide," because if they do, then they are required by UN law to step in and help. All they've done is passed a resolution giving the ICC jurisdiction over Sudan war criminals, and the Sudan responded with a big "Fuck you, we're rejecting that shit." Without SC approval, all the rest of the UN can do is recommend and send humanitarian aid. Hopefully you're right, and the SC is finally growing some balls.

based on their current African operations, it looks like they are.

I hope they move into Darfur as well. The SC needs to ignore national interest just this once in order to end the 200-yr genocide in that region.

The UN and balls being discused as they refer to Congo. Does that mean they're raping even more Congolese women?

U.N. 'peacekeepers' rape women, children. Widespread sex scandal threatens to become 'United Nations' Abu Ghraib' (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42088)

One of the biggest problems the UN faces IMHO is that they were not designed for this sort of intervention, but rather to facilitate dialouge between nations so the UN is stuck with many rules that prevent them from being effective.

(cross posted from A Far Cry Left (http://farcryleft.blogspot.com/))
The UN is using more force in the world (http://nytimes.com/2005/05/23/international/africa/23congo.html?ei=5094&en=0362405b74c9cc4c&hp=&ex=1116907200&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1116821536-Kb6R4jzX9iuILJsbXc7u/Q)

The UN, after decades of being strangled by the security council on matters of international peacekeeping, is finally growing some balls.

The operations, mainly taking place in Africe, have learned heavily from the UNs inability to do anything in Rwanda for years. The result is that the UN is using much more force in its peacekeeping operations. Soliders are invoking chapter (http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm) VII of the UN Charter - something that allows the UN peacekeepers to protect themselves with force. They are finally doing it.

Congo was a starting point, and now, with over 16,000 Peacekeepers (http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/home.shtml), the UN is finally being effective. The soldiers are now getting the support of Mi-25 Attack Helicopters (http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/hind/specs.html), Tanks, APCs, Mortars, and RPGs.

Where the UN faced sniper attacks unable to answer before, they are now searching house to house at gunpoint, conducting night raids, and using attack helicopters to strafe forested streatches of suspected rebel hideouts.

An interesting fact - after the 1990s, most Western nations stopped contributing soldiers to the peacekeeping force. Only 45% of peacekeepers are now from Western Nations. The other 55% comes from the developing world.

The UN is now moving into a useful phase of its life. Instead of becoming more useless, the Security Council has been authorizing itself to use force in its peacekeeping situations. This could wuite actually be one of the most useful things the UN has ever done. Now, instead of having people watch slaughter, the UN can stop it. About time.

So, lets keep the US in the UN, lets contribute more troops, and lets start using our Security Council position to actually get something done instead of vetoing everything and then bitching.
This is good news!!! I am all for a stronger UN presence in the affairs of the world. :)

The UN and balls being discused as they refer to Congo. Does that mean they're raping even more Congolese women?


I admit the UN has plenty of its own faults, but that doesn't dimish from the fact that they are actually getting something done in the world that is productive.

This is good news!!! I am all for a stronger UN presence in the affairs of the world. :)

yeah, rather that than the US going about doing whatever it wants without international support

I admit the UN has plenty of its own faults, but that doesn't dimish from the fact that they are actually getting something done in the world that is productive.

What they're doing there isn't a "fault", it's an atrocity. Being executed by the very people supposedly there to "keep the peace". In case you and the NYTimesbs didn't notice they're not doing anything to stop the fighting either. All they're doing is getting allot of member nation soldiers killed. What documentable evidence of anything "productive" being accomplished in Congo do you have?

What they're doing there isn't a "fault", it's an atrocity. Being executed by the very people supposedly there to "keep the peace". In case you and the NYTimesbs didn't notice they're not doing anything to stop the fighting either. All they're doing is getting allot of member nation soldiers killed. What documentable evidence of anything "productive" being accomplished in Congo do you have?

Just a passing fact: depsite the fact that you hate the NYTimes, it is still the most read and most accurate paper in the world. Also the most recognized as a legitiamte news source.

Start here:
http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/monuc/
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/congo/2004/0726renewplus.htm

You should like this one by the Heritage Foundation (conservative watchdog group)
http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalOrganizations/hl868.cfm
Note: the UN has acknowledged the problem and is trying to correct it.

The Congo Daily reports on some actions of the UN
http://www.congodaily.com/
IGE report
http://www.globalengagement.org/issues/2003/07/congo.htm

So, we have the problem, we have the UN answer, and we have analysis by differing groups.