 |
||||||||
|
2/28/2003 07:45:00 PM | Brad Plumer The emperor has no clothes! Daily Kos has a good summary of the jockeying for position going on in the Security Council right now. In the end, the new resolution may hinge on two countries, Cameroon and Guinea. Kos goes on to comment: This is ironic. Very ironic. Beyond ironic. Because in any coalition for democracy, these two are really awkward fits. They’re both stereotypical African "big man" dictatorships, ruled by leaders with, um, extensive human rights records. Not to mention criminal records.I'm sorry, but no. You can't have it both ways. Either the UN is a credible organization whose members' opinions count, or its a ragtag group of deformed democracies and rabid despots whose moral authority may be legitimately ignored by the US. Kos can't seem to make up his mind. Nowhere does he worry that China and Syria fall well short of democratic standards. Nowhere does he fret that France is carrying on an imperialist invasion of its own. So which is it? Graham and others, feel free to respond (and the D website was down, so Graham, I couldn't remember what you said in your latest article. Apologies for redundancies). Just about every appeal to the sanctity and necessity of the UN strike me as either flimsy or outright contradictory. Case in point above. The US gets blamed when it goes against the will of dictators, and then gets blasted when it starts building its own coalition of mustachioed villains. I don't get it. I will readily oppose the war on the basis of humanitarian concerns, first off, and practical concerns, second. But I could care less about international organization arguments. This entire conflict has exposed the UN for the misguided farce that it really is. At the very least I hope that this whole Iraq catastrophe results in a more credible, more effective UN. But it will need serious revamping. Update: another dictator against the US. Are anti-war voices ready to ally with Pakistan, Syria and China as the "lesser of two evils"? Are they willing to vault these countries into global prominence via organizations like the UN, if only as a desperate measure to contain the US? And haven't we chastized the US for following just this policy in that past? perma link |
| 0 comments
0 Comments: |
Dartmouth The Free Press Alums for Social Change The Green Magazine The Dartmouth Dartmouth Observer Dartmouth Review Dartlog Inner Office The Little Green Blog Welton Chang's Blog Vox in Sox MN Publius (Matthew Martin) Netblitz Dartmouth Official News Other Blogs Ampersand Atrios Arts & Letters Altercation Body and Soul Blog For America Brad DeLong Brad Plumer CalPundit Campus Nonsense Clarksphere Crooked Timber Cursor Daily Kos Dean Nation Dan Drezner The Front Line Instapundit Interesting Times Is That Legal? Talking Points Memo Lady-Likely Lawrence Lessig Lean Left Left2Right Legal Theory Matthew Yglesias Ms. Musings MWO Nathan Newman New Republic's &c. Not Geniuses Ornicus Oxblog Pandagon Political State Report Political Theory Daily Review Queer Day Roger Ailes SCOTUS blog Talk Left TAPPED Tacitus This Modern World Tough Democrat Untelevised Volokh Conspiracy Washington Note X. & Overboard Magazines, Newspapers and Journals Boston Globe Ideas Boston Review Chronicle of Higher Education Common Dreams Dissent In These Times Mother Jones New York Review of Books New York Times Salon Slate The American Prospect The Nation The New Republic The Progressive Tikkun Tom Paine Village Voice Washington Monthly Capitol Hill Media ABC's The Note American Journalism Review Columbia Journalism Review CQ Daily Howler Donkey Rising The Hill Medianews National Journal NJ Hotline NJ Wake-up call NJ Early Bird NJ Weekly Political Wire Roll Call Spinsanity Search Search the DFP  |
|||||||
The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth College or the Dartmouth Free Press.