Kofi Says Goodbye
In my morning email from the Wall Street Journal I find this 'quote of the day' from Kofi Annan. I find it kind of weird and not completely understandable, but maybe it's me and you can figure out what he's saying in contemporary political context. It's from his farewell speech to General Assembly. Read on.
Quote of the Day "The events of the last 10 years have not resolved, but sharpened, the three great challenges I spoke of: an unjust world economy, world disorder, and widespread contempt for human rights and the rule of law. As a result, we face a world whose divisions threaten the very notion of an international community upon which this institution stands, and this is happening at the very time when more than ever before human beings throughout the world form a single society," U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said yesterday in the final address to the annual General Assembly of his tenure. "So many of the challenges we face are global. They demand a response in which all peoples must play their part. I deliberately say 'all peoples' echoing the preamble of our charter and not 'all states.' It was clear to me 10 years ago, and is even clearer now, that international relations are not a matter of states alone. They are relations between peoples, in which so-called 'non-state actors' play a vital role and can make a vital contribution. All must play their part in a true multilateral world order with a renewed, dynamic United Nations at its center."
OK, so the unjust world economy I think everyone can agree with and understand. What we don't agree on is how to go about making the world more just in that department. But this is a function of international trade relations, of which the final part of the "Doha round" was hijacked by the agendas of non-state actors Hamas and Hezbollah by invading the sovereign territory of a UN member nation state and kidnapping its soldiers, which wound up starting a short distracting war.
As to world disorder, what exactly does he mean by that?
"… we face a world whose divisions threaten the very notion of an international community upon which this institution stands, and this is happening at the very time when more than ever before human beings throughout the world form a single society."
Ah, the old 'single society' game.
Well, just what is that international community made of?
"So many of the challenges we face are global. They demand a response in which all peoples must play their part. I deliberately say 'all peoples' echoing the preamble of our charter and not 'all states.'
Apparently the UN does not consist of 'States,' it consists of "peoples." It consists of "a single society."
"They are relations between peoples, in which so-called 'non-state actors' play a vital role and can make a vital contribution."
So, non-state actors, like Hamas and Hezbollah, not to mention al quaeda, the ETA and numerous other separatists have a vital role to play. Yet these non-state actors do not have a seat at the UN table. Maybe it's because the 'Nations' that make up the United Nations would rather they not.
I can read this a number of ways and perhaps someone can help me decide which is more plausible.
1.) Kofi really inhabits one of those alternative universes popular in science fiction where there are no 'nations' at the United Nations. There are only peoples, not people.
2.) The Black Helicopter folk really are right. The UN is working for one unified world government where only they make the rules, which would eliminate this "disorder" of nation states.
3.) Anybody with a gun and a gripe should be allowed a seat at the UN table.
4.) Human Rights would be talked about constantly. However, these 'peoples' would continue to be slaughtered by the millions with no Nation States to intervene. (I ascertain this from Kofi's current action in the Sudan against the Janjaweed, another of those non-state actors, which consists of watching the slaughter continue, much as he watched the slaughter in Rawanda and other places.)
Maybe I missed something. Maybe this part of the speech was just taken out of context and in the larger portion there was much explanatory verbiage. If so, feel free to clue me in, because I'm so ashamed of having this morally corrupt piece of crap as the head of the UN for the past ten years I'm afraid that I would assault my innocent computer were I to read more of the same.
For bonus points: Explain to me exactly what the function is of this modern "United Nations."
