Too Little, Too Late

The Economist Reports today on Kofi Annan's plans to reform the United Nations.

"He is calling for an expansion of the Security Council, so that it better reflects the global realities of today,though he did not specify how the council's membership and veto rules should be changed. The Commission on Human Rights would, he proposes, be replaced by a smaller human-rights council, on which it would be harder for tyrants to get seats. To avoid repeats of past stalemates, the UN would agree a definition of "terrorism", which would be incorporated in a new anti-terror treaty. It would also adopt clearer principles on when military force is justified."

A good start, I must say.

"As for the smaller council that Mr Annan wants to see replace the 53-member Commission on Human Rights, its members would have to be approved by a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly. In an ideal world, membership of this and other important UN bodies would be restricted to democracies."

In an ideal world? Of course, in glaring contrast to many large and populous world nations' democratic systems of government stands China. The Economist declares that removing China from the Commission on Human Rights and other UN Committees is "unthinkable." Isn't this the problem with the UN to begin with? It's reluctance to permit and even demand democratic change in its member states? And on with the UN's pesky problem with defining "terrorism:"

"Mr Annan's panel achieved unanimity on such a definition: any act intended 'to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians'. But some Arab UN members, with Palestine in mind, may still demand exemptions for those resisting foreign occupation."

Oh, that's right - killing civilians intentionally is wrong, except if you're killing Israeli civilians in Palestine.

"Even so, it will be tough to get the two-thirds majority among member countries that Mr Annan's reforms will need. Even those that ought to command unanimity, such as a drastic shake-out of bureaucracy and corruption in UN bodies, are likely to run up against some governments' vested interests at some stage..."

It's true that the UN is in need of major reforms as well as it's true that major reforms will be very difficult to get through the General Assembly. However, as stated in the title, as far as I'm concerned it is too little, too late. The UN and it's countless bureaucrats need to come clean first about the corruption that happened and is happening under their wings - starting with Kofi Annan. I've commented before on how despicable the corruption and the manipulation of the UN has been, and without Kofi admitting to the UN's vast problems, without defining "terrorism," and without actively encouraging democracy, I fear that the UN is doomed to be more of the same.