Coming Out Swinging
Doubtless the General Assembly was fairly full of diplomatic representatives of its 192-member countries when U.S. President Barack Obama addressed the august gathering. It would be interesting to know how many were in the audience to listen to Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when it came his turn to address the gathering; discounting of course those who filed from the chamber when he took his place at the podium.
Most civilized western countries preferred to absent themselves rather than to submit to his verbal-diarrhea abuse of reasonable discourse.
Which would leave those who might approve of delusionary insanity frothing from a madman, or those just curious to hear what might emanate from his feverish cerebrum that they hadn't heard before. And then there was the address of the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper. A good speech by all accounts, from a resolute, intelligent, well-balanced lawmaker whose moral insights the majority of member-countries could benefit from.
Canada, considered a middling-power, one of the original founding members of the United Nations (League of Nations), and 7th-largest contributor. A country which continues to fulfill its UN obligations. A country whose contributions to developing nations are generous and ongoing. It was noted that a mere handful of diplomats remained present in the Assembly when Prime Minister Harper spoke.
Boredom? Diplomatic testiness or rebuke? Given how heavily weighted the United Nations is with member-countries who resent the economically and technologically advanced, democratic nations, preferring to make common cause with those who rail against them as a bloc while demanding historical reparations from once-colonial pasts, perhaps edifying in this instance.
Does this auger ill or even iffy for Canada to be voted a place on the temporary Security Council? Should we care, given the obvious and lamentable dysfunctionality of the United Nations? It is like an elite club whom the truly elite scorn, yet contrive to remain within, despite the presence of those aspiring to become themselves elite; clamorous hangers-on not understanding that in this instance elitism can be conflated with moral civility.
"It is essential that we strive to make a significant, actual difference in the lives of the world's most disadvantaged people. Who, seeing his neighbour distressed, will pass by on the other side of the road?" Meant as rhetorical, but in fact, not all the listeners representing the bulk of the countries had they been present, would have understood that such responsibilities reside with everyone, not only wealthy countries.
Canada, its government and its people do feel a responsibility toward other countries of the world. Canada does respond as it should and as it will, as it can when the need is great. Even though both internally and externally there are those who sneer at what they term an inadequate response. In terms of practical aid and treasury Canada is there on the international scene, effectively and proudly.
That, under this government of Stephen Harper, Canada has resolved to position itself officially in support of a small democratic country in the Middle East whose existence is continually threatened by neighbours who resent its presence as an alien religion, ideology, social and political entity, represents an honest and integrity-reflected decision.
In contrast to previous Canadian governments which preferred to dance around the issue to ensure that criticism could be deflected from a powerful Arab and Islamic bloc within the UN. An ethical fence-sitting act of moral relativism that should have shamed previous governments, but was viewed instead as practical realpolitik.
Re-election to temporary membership of the Security Council should be assured, given Canada's past and present performance and relationships within the United Nations. The make-up of the current temporary members include states whose human rights records, whose associations do not shine a light of enlightenment upon them.
But which do reflect the general state of the UN, just as the ethical functionality of the UN Human Rights Commission does; a complete and utter farce.
The very administration and leadership of the United Nations as a world body has lost its lustre in the very fact that its representatives at the highest echelons of the world body cordially greet and welcome world leaders whose atrocious and miserable records on human rights appall those in the general body who hold those like Ahmadinejad to account.
Not too many words of condemnation greet a president of a country which continues to openly and violently threaten the existence of a neighbour, while that same body placidly condemns the self-defence actions of the threatened country as representing a hugely abusive, violent over-reaction.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper remains true to his values, to his stoic and determined intent to portray himself and the country he represents as a democratic stalwart within a coven of unreconstructed, socially backward, politically warped and ideologically hindered states sharing a conceit of abased entitlements.
Most civilized western countries preferred to absent themselves rather than to submit to his verbal-diarrhea abuse of reasonable discourse.
Which would leave those who might approve of delusionary insanity frothing from a madman, or those just curious to hear what might emanate from his feverish cerebrum that they hadn't heard before. And then there was the address of the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper. A good speech by all accounts, from a resolute, intelligent, well-balanced lawmaker whose moral insights the majority of member-countries could benefit from.
Canada, considered a middling-power, one of the original founding members of the United Nations (League of Nations), and 7th-largest contributor. A country which continues to fulfill its UN obligations. A country whose contributions to developing nations are generous and ongoing. It was noted that a mere handful of diplomats remained present in the Assembly when Prime Minister Harper spoke.
Boredom? Diplomatic testiness or rebuke? Given how heavily weighted the United Nations is with member-countries who resent the economically and technologically advanced, democratic nations, preferring to make common cause with those who rail against them as a bloc while demanding historical reparations from once-colonial pasts, perhaps edifying in this instance.
Does this auger ill or even iffy for Canada to be voted a place on the temporary Security Council? Should we care, given the obvious and lamentable dysfunctionality of the United Nations? It is like an elite club whom the truly elite scorn, yet contrive to remain within, despite the presence of those aspiring to become themselves elite; clamorous hangers-on not understanding that in this instance elitism can be conflated with moral civility.
"It is essential that we strive to make a significant, actual difference in the lives of the world's most disadvantaged people. Who, seeing his neighbour distressed, will pass by on the other side of the road?" Meant as rhetorical, but in fact, not all the listeners representing the bulk of the countries had they been present, would have understood that such responsibilities reside with everyone, not only wealthy countries.
Canada, its government and its people do feel a responsibility toward other countries of the world. Canada does respond as it should and as it will, as it can when the need is great. Even though both internally and externally there are those who sneer at what they term an inadequate response. In terms of practical aid and treasury Canada is there on the international scene, effectively and proudly.
That, under this government of Stephen Harper, Canada has resolved to position itself officially in support of a small democratic country in the Middle East whose existence is continually threatened by neighbours who resent its presence as an alien religion, ideology, social and political entity, represents an honest and integrity-reflected decision.
In contrast to previous Canadian governments which preferred to dance around the issue to ensure that criticism could be deflected from a powerful Arab and Islamic bloc within the UN. An ethical fence-sitting act of moral relativism that should have shamed previous governments, but was viewed instead as practical realpolitik.
Re-election to temporary membership of the Security Council should be assured, given Canada's past and present performance and relationships within the United Nations. The make-up of the current temporary members include states whose human rights records, whose associations do not shine a light of enlightenment upon them.
But which do reflect the general state of the UN, just as the ethical functionality of the UN Human Rights Commission does; a complete and utter farce.
The very administration and leadership of the United Nations as a world body has lost its lustre in the very fact that its representatives at the highest echelons of the world body cordially greet and welcome world leaders whose atrocious and miserable records on human rights appall those in the general body who hold those like Ahmadinejad to account.
Not too many words of condemnation greet a president of a country which continues to openly and violently threaten the existence of a neighbour, while that same body placidly condemns the self-defence actions of the threatened country as representing a hugely abusive, violent over-reaction.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper remains true to his values, to his stoic and determined intent to portray himself and the country he represents as a democratic stalwart within a coven of unreconstructed, socially backward, politically warped and ideologically hindered states sharing a conceit of abased entitlements.
Labels: Crisis Politics, Government of Canada, United Nations
posted by Pieface | 7:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home