Ottowa Citizen
He also argued that a UN with powers to sideline countries pursuing narrow national interests would be better placed to adequately focus on the
world's many problems -- among them, climate change, slaughter in Sudan's Darfur, and the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict.[...]
"Occasionally, I look at our international institutions and think as I do about (the British) welfare state: the structures of 1946 trying to meet
the challenges of 2006."
Wouldn't any of these things be addressable if the US and UK made a big enough stink about them inside the UN???
Also, what does he think that the UN can do, or rather what reforms are needed? The UN sponsors mediation between the Arabs and Israelis. Short of
taking a side, what can it do?
And on Sudan, since the british and americans have the most advanced militaries and best ability to get involved in the Darfur, what does he think a
responsible reform would be? Any UN military action would have to involve the UK and US as the main body. Just look at what went wrong in Somalia,
there was reliance upon the UN troops. The 'command' was seperated into different units. Is blair suggesting that the US and UK have some of its
military divisions put under direct UN command?
