In Memoriam August 19, 2003 – Moon of Alabama

August 19, 2004

In Memoriam August 19, 2003

… The UN is precious – not because of its name, but because it struggles, however imperfectly, to reach global consensus on the world’s critical issues. The fanatics who blew up the UN mission dealt a severe blow to its fortunes in the Middle East. But more lasting damage is being done to the legitimacy of this irreplaceable institution by demands to obey US dictates. If it continues to bow to pressure, its capital will be squandered and its resolutions rendered weightless for large chunks of humanity.

Member states and the secretary general should see this eroding legitimacy as the greatest challenge the organisation faces. But they will be unable to make effective headway unless the US itself recognises that it needs, in its own interest, to show greater respect for the UN, from which it can learn to define and pursue its own interests more wisely.

United Nations:
Observance of the First Anniversary of the Baghdad Tragedy

Posted by b on August 19, 2004 at 15:59 UTC | Permalink

Comments

I didn’t read the site. Too hard…
Here, today, the newspapers were filled with tributes for Sergio (Viera di Mello), as well as the others who died. Double page of anniversaries. Two people in my office were crying. We spoke about…all those who knew…who knew. We spoke about when me and Gab occupied the offices that were Sergio’s…(I work for the State, which occupied that building before the UN took it over..)
One paper ran an inteview of Sergio’s mistress, who was astonished that she had never been questioned by anyone, except briefly, by the FBI. She survived the attack by leaving the room some time before the bomb(s). The article went on to detail the abysmal security that is still current at UN outposts, pointing out that a culture change is necessary. Organising peace keeping missions with the casques bleus is not the same as protecting oneself from ‘terrorists’.
All the articles (about 6, I read most of the Swiss press) castigated everyone for not coming up with any culprits. They screamed: Who are the terrorists? Where is the police work? What is Koffi Annan doing? Why is there a mission in Baghdad now, with no better security? What is the use of security if one is a passive participant ? It can never be adequate.
One article explained that Koffi is being blackmailed to keep a mission in Iraq.
The investigation of the irregularities (sanction – busters, cheaters, skimmers..) in the oil-for-food program are in the hands of the Americans, as all the documents have been requisitioned by them. Richard Goldstone, US (ex Yugo-int-tribunal, quit for health reasons, more likely due to disagreement with Carla del Ponte about Milosevic, who can’t be convicted..?..) is part of the 3-man investigative team in the oil-for-food corruption commission, and in the article the finger was pointed at him, subtly and indirectly, probably unjustly as Paul Volcker, US, ex-Federal Reserve is in it too — last member is a Swiss lawyer, M. Pieth.
Each time Koffi refuses to send people to Iraq or makes noises about not being capable of overseeing ‘elections’, some nasty poison from the oil-for-food papers is put forward, distilled, or leaked to the press.
So it was explained.

Posted by: Blackie | Aug 19 2004 19:52 utc | 1

Remember Mary Robinson, she was hounded out of office by the USA.
She was left leaning and had integrity. This about matches Blackie’s take on the good old USA and the UN.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 19 2004 20:21 utc | 2

Just searched New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times for United Nations. Zero, null, zilch on this sad aniversary. Google News says ABCnews and Boston Globe have something, thats about it.
Doesn´t say it all?

Posted by: b | Aug 19 2004 20:50 utc | 3

Koffi begged on bended knee for Mary Robinson not to quit. She stayed for an extra year, crying with disgust. She was good, as outspoken as was possible.

Posted by: Blackie | Aug 19 2004 22:11 utc | 4

“She was good, as outspoken as was possible.”
Bet they (repugs) found some stuff to keep her silent, the same shit that they have on the other leaders of the Coalition of the Killing.
McCreevy?

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 19 2004 22:16 utc | 5

the UN *should* be a place for understanding between peoples and other positive stuff. fact is that the UN never had a chance at this, and instead has always been a figleaf for american and european imperial projects, pushing big enemas up the assholes of the poor nations full with brown people if they wouldn’t swallow the unsavory stuff forced on them by the US or europe. robinson is the exponent of a minority with no effective influence on the deeds of the UN.
they had the bombings coming at them, and they probably have other very ugly things coming at them for their disgraceful role in too many crimes against humanity. its not like the people don’t see or are stupider just because they are browner (sic).
given the reality of the UN being a mere extension of the foreign ministries of the “developed” nations, i can only say good riddance and fuck ya all to the UN !

Posted by: name | Aug 19 2004 22:59 utc | 6

@name
US Airforce delivering the coup de’tat to the Freedom Fighters and the UN at the moment.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Aug 19 2004 23:07 utc | 7

Mary Robinson, minority, no real influence, yes.
Some UN employees are just like any other employees, do your job, get paid, that’s it. Some are unashamedly on the gravy train, mostly these are posted or installed by their Governments. Many others have a genuine humanitarian ethic, that is, to put it short and sweet, they are on the side of the underdog. Some of these are naive, although that is getting rarer these days. Others are well aware of the forces in play, but their attitude is, one has to try anyway.
Sergio’s team in Iraq most likely belonged to the last category.
The Guardian article (Aug 2004), by Salim Lone, linked below, briefly describes the burn-down of the Bremer – S. D. Viera relationship. It is rather restrained in tone, careful.
The second link (Dec 2002) is a typical interview of Sergio. On sanctions:
I would say that if the regime continues then I am afraid that the sanctions regime that the Security Council has imposed on Iraq will also continue. And the Security Council being the supreme organ in determining the rules when it comes to international peace and security, there is no way that the United Nations agencies, humanitarian agencies, my office, can derogate from those norms.
Humanitarian agencies have been actively involved in attempting to assist the Iraqi people over the years. I was a member of a Security Council panel on the oil for food regime and the sanctions imposed on Iraq. We did our best to improve the lot of the Iraqi people – let’s not forget that it also takes two to tango and the Iraqi government also has a great deal of responsibility in terms of assisting its population and allowing the oil for food regime to work better than it has.
On may see a man who covertly supports the West’s agenda; one may see a man who is caught up in the contradiction, as he said at another time, of having to play second fiddle to two powerful member states (US, GB); one may see a man despairing, therefore avid for action once on the ground. All those interpretations are possible. Ultimately, it comes down to a question of personal responsibility, and strategy, if one focuses on the personal rather than the Institutional.
The UN does nothing but reflect power relationships in the world. Those who have clout use it, often by simply paying money, or refusing to pay it, or by other means. A fig leaf for imperial projects, yes. See from afar, disgusting; seen from below, sometimes, a window for action, hope.
(But Iraq is a different story from ex-Yugoslavia.)
Link 1
Link 2

Posted by: Blackie | Aug 20 2004 18:50 utc | 8

Mary Robinson committed the one single fatal mistake that gets you shot in every organisation where the US has any significant power, she decided to do the right thing and go after Israel’s crimes. I hope Louise Arbour won’t get shot too quickly; looks like she doesn’t want to allow the usual shit to go on.
Concerning De Mello, it’s worth noting that US troops were withdrawn a few time before the bombing and that some UN people asked for a bit more of security, but the US didn’t bother to. Heck, they didn’t do it when the ministries, the National Library and the National Museum were looted and destroyed.
One could also wonder if someone or some group didn’t find it convenient to actually scare the UN out of Iraq and get rid of De Mello once and for all. Some powers are already finding that Annan doesn’t obey them enough now, and De Mello would probably have been a stronger will. But I shouldn’t mention such tinfoil hat theories; it’s not as if officials of the biggest powers on Earth ever conceived terrorist acts against their own country just to push it to war. I mean, Operation Northwoods is just straight from a SF novel, isn’t it?

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Aug 20 2004 19:14 utc | 9

@ blackie:
i myself and other members of my family have worked in different capacities and positions for the UN. the people i met were bureaucrats, careerists, political appointees, spies. common traits were incompetence, subordination and the feeling of being something special, over and above the people outside the UN colony (hey, they can’t buy cheap at the depot like us). what i never met at the UN was anybody who gave a cold fart for whatever happened anywhere outside the UN bubble.
the world needs a UN, but it needs a UN without the USA and without israel, the IMF, the WB, and with another way of arriving at decisions. permanent presence in the security council, veto powers and such should have no place in an institution supposedly for the common good.

Posted by: name | Aug 21 2004 0:22 utc | 10

Back to Main