First in a series, to look closely at the United Nations Organization. One of the outcomes of World War II was the formation of the United Nations. Its predecessor, the League of Nations, which followed World War I, not only failed to prevent another global conflagration, but it also failed as an organization.By comparison, the UNO has flourished. It now has 193 member states, employs more than 120,000 people in New York and around the world (and who knows how many in related but separate entities?) a budget in 2023 of $8.4 billion, and 15 specialized agencies that carry out various functions on its behalf. It is also friendly with many other fellow travellers, such as the World Economic Forum.The United Nations has become a colossus.It is not unusual for non-accountable bodies, especially those in regulatory or quasi-government roles, to experience mission creep. A broader mandate (enabled by legislation or not) leads to a bigger office, more compensation, and enhanced prestige.In the case of the UN, the creep has become a gallop.The original primary purpose of the UN was “maintaining international peace and security”, thus: “The work of the United Nations reaches every corner of the globe. Although best known for peacekeeping, there are many other ways the UN and its system (specialized agencies, funds, and programmes) affect our lives, and to make the world a better place the organization works on a broad range of fundamental issues from sustainable development, environment and refugees protection, disaster relief, counterterrorism, disarmament and non-proliferation, to promoting democracy, human rights, gender equality and the advancement of women, economic and social development and international health, clearing landmines, expanding food production, and more, to achieve its goals and coordinated efforts for a safer world for this and future generations”. (Wikipedia)However, one of the UN's notable deficiencies, (maybe applicable to Wikipedia as well, just saying) is an increasing progressive bias as the evolving above agenda suggests. After all, whether it is making the world “a better place” depends on one’s values and political beliefs, doesn't it?In earlier days it became well known for its peacekeeping duties, calling on other nations to supply troops at their cost. The UN can boast considerable success, particularly when North Korea invaded the South in 1950, and its contribution to ending the Suez crisis 6 years later.Canada was then known for its leading peacekeeper role and respected for its military. A significant reason for the failure to resolve big core mission issues is the structure of the UN. Each Security Council member, possesses a veto, compromising effectiveness in addressing important global conflicts. Not to worry, its huge and growing bureaucracy and the absence of accountability, enable it to operate according to its objectives. And, regrettably and inevitably, the primary objective today is to establish ever more control over its member countries.After all, these are superior people, dedicating their lives to the noble cause of a better world, and like all socialists believe elites are entitled to direct the lives of others.Is this just the whining hyperbole of one who believes in free markets? These pages write often about the importance of “tone from the top.” (My quotation, not Wikipedia.) It is informative to consider the life, work experience, and demonstrated objectives of Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.The 9th Secretary-General took office on January 1, 2017. Before his appointment he served as the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees, then President of Portugal, followed by six years at Socialist International, also as President. He is as socialist as they come and his actions and tone have enhanced the progressive agenda around the world.Do we in Canada, as well as other Western democracies, need an organization created to promote peace, to increasingly interfere with, and direct our policies? Who in Canada is against gender equality, for example, and why is it the business of the United Nations? The next three parts of this series will dive into areas that support the theme that the United Nations has become a divider of nations. And worse, it contributes to divisions and rancour within member states.The topics will include some of the hottest and most divisive political issues of the day, including refugees/immigration, support of Hamas as an Iranian proxy to eliminate Israel and all Jewish people, the role of WHO in the response to COVID, and the granddaddy of all issues, the persistent but much-contested claims that the world is experiencing a climate crisis.Those of us of a certain age often wonder about the genesis and momentum of the progressive agenda which is a full frontal repudiation of the primacy of the individual and our human, political and economic rights in favour of identified, usually disenchanted groups.While politicians, regulatory bodies, media and educators (especially it seems within our universities) are among the influencers, the United Nations Organization can take a bow as the leading purveyor of progressive poppycock.Will its apparent ambition to become a global government, in charge of the world and all of us, become the next reality?Part II will review the UN’s unsuccessful and ill-advised role in Israel’s mission to become a safe home for Jewish people and others. Surrounded by control and command protagonists, Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East.
First in a series, to look closely at the United Nations Organization. One of the outcomes of World War II was the formation of the United Nations. Its predecessor, the League of Nations, which followed World War I, not only failed to prevent another global conflagration, but it also failed as an organization.By comparison, the UNO has flourished. It now has 193 member states, employs more than 120,000 people in New York and around the world (and who knows how many in related but separate entities?) a budget in 2023 of $8.4 billion, and 15 specialized agencies that carry out various functions on its behalf. It is also friendly with many other fellow travellers, such as the World Economic Forum.The United Nations has become a colossus.It is not unusual for non-accountable bodies, especially those in regulatory or quasi-government roles, to experience mission creep. A broader mandate (enabled by legislation or not) leads to a bigger office, more compensation, and enhanced prestige.In the case of the UN, the creep has become a gallop.The original primary purpose of the UN was “maintaining international peace and security”, thus: “The work of the United Nations reaches every corner of the globe. Although best known for peacekeeping, there are many other ways the UN and its system (specialized agencies, funds, and programmes) affect our lives, and to make the world a better place the organization works on a broad range of fundamental issues from sustainable development, environment and refugees protection, disaster relief, counterterrorism, disarmament and non-proliferation, to promoting democracy, human rights, gender equality and the advancement of women, economic and social development and international health, clearing landmines, expanding food production, and more, to achieve its goals and coordinated efforts for a safer world for this and future generations”. (Wikipedia)However, one of the UN's notable deficiencies, (maybe applicable to Wikipedia as well, just saying) is an increasing progressive bias as the evolving above agenda suggests. After all, whether it is making the world “a better place” depends on one’s values and political beliefs, doesn't it?In earlier days it became well known for its peacekeeping duties, calling on other nations to supply troops at their cost. The UN can boast considerable success, particularly when North Korea invaded the South in 1950, and its contribution to ending the Suez crisis 6 years later.Canada was then known for its leading peacekeeper role and respected for its military. A significant reason for the failure to resolve big core mission issues is the structure of the UN. Each Security Council member, possesses a veto, compromising effectiveness in addressing important global conflicts. Not to worry, its huge and growing bureaucracy and the absence of accountability, enable it to operate according to its objectives. And, regrettably and inevitably, the primary objective today is to establish ever more control over its member countries.After all, these are superior people, dedicating their lives to the noble cause of a better world, and like all socialists believe elites are entitled to direct the lives of others.Is this just the whining hyperbole of one who believes in free markets? These pages write often about the importance of “tone from the top.” (My quotation, not Wikipedia.) It is informative to consider the life, work experience, and demonstrated objectives of Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.The 9th Secretary-General took office on January 1, 2017. Before his appointment he served as the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees, then President of Portugal, followed by six years at Socialist International, also as President. He is as socialist as they come and his actions and tone have enhanced the progressive agenda around the world.Do we in Canada, as well as other Western democracies, need an organization created to promote peace, to increasingly interfere with, and direct our policies? Who in Canada is against gender equality, for example, and why is it the business of the United Nations? The next three parts of this series will dive into areas that support the theme that the United Nations has become a divider of nations. And worse, it contributes to divisions and rancour within member states.The topics will include some of the hottest and most divisive political issues of the day, including refugees/immigration, support of Hamas as an Iranian proxy to eliminate Israel and all Jewish people, the role of WHO in the response to COVID, and the granddaddy of all issues, the persistent but much-contested claims that the world is experiencing a climate crisis.Those of us of a certain age often wonder about the genesis and momentum of the progressive agenda which is a full frontal repudiation of the primacy of the individual and our human, political and economic rights in favour of identified, usually disenchanted groups.While politicians, regulatory bodies, media and educators (especially it seems within our universities) are among the influencers, the United Nations Organization can take a bow as the leading purveyor of progressive poppycock.Will its apparent ambition to become a global government, in charge of the world and all of us, become the next reality?Part II will review the UN’s unsuccessful and ill-advised role in Israel’s mission to become a safe home for Jewish people and others. Surrounded by control and command protagonists, Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East.
