Head of UN organisation criticises US decision to cut fundin

Post Reply New Topic

Summary of story from UN News Centre, November 2, 2011

The head of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Irina Bokova, voiced regret yesterday over the decision by the United States to withhold its dues to the agency.

This followed a vote by the organisation’s General Conference on Monday to admit Palestine as a full member of the Paris-based agency. The decision was supported by 107 member States, with 14 against and 52 abstentions. The United States had opposed the move.

“UNESCO is encouraged that the United States will maintain its membership in the organisation and hopes that a resolution to the funding issue will ultimately be identified,” she added.

She called on the US administration, Congress and the American people “to find a way forward and continue support for UNESCO in these turbulent times.”

Should leave the whole organization.

What was apartheid?

Tadzio

United States says f**k you democracy. <.< Way to go. Not that I should speak since that failure of a Prime Minister Harper did likewise. -facepalm-

So you want Israel to have indefensible borders, sorry but that's not happening.

Give me a break. I've torn apart the extremely limited argument you have given to support this statement on several occasions now. You clearly have not analyzed the situation in depth

Democracy?

I would describe the UN as many things--most of them positive. But I would never describe it as democratic.

It's national government level democratic in the sense that each nation got a vote and most voted in a direction the US didn't like, so the US government throw a hissy fit and stopped paying it's dues to UNESCO. I'd agree that the UN should be more people-level democratic, which is why I'd support a UN Parliamentary Assembly. The US would still get a result it didn't like when it comes to Palestinian statehood, of course (probably more so).

Mendicants and beggars should not criticize their betters and benefactors

ruveyn

That makes "All People Are Created Equal" sound like total hypocrisy!! !

Or is it just back to the polemics of "our" clique members, or back to the rigged Casino of "random" & "pseudo-equal & accessible" "equal chance" blow-gut opportunities?

Sure, we can all be born winning the Lottery at every turn if we just "try". But that still requires Kissing The Great Ramses' Royal Family's idols in following its, and only its, loaded rules.

Tadzio

I believe my brother posted this thread as a joke because it is a joke Joker is such a silly gentile at times

The equality of Man is balderdash. No two humans are equal. Not even identical twins or triplets.

ruveyn

Your right their is always a man or womam that is better and who has no equal just like Michael Jordan has no equal when it comes to basketball.

The entire notion of democracy in multilateral relations between states is foolishly misguided. Given that the borders of nation states are entirely arbitrary things, any notion that Monaco is somehow equal in importance to India is nonsensical. Why is the United States one vote instead of 50? Why did the Soviet Union have three votes instead of one? It is precisely the foolishness of "democratic" decision making that necessitated the establishment of the Security Council, and the provision of vetoes to its permanent members. The UN could not function otherwise. The UN serves an important role in international diplomacy--but never lets us for a moment deceive ourselves that it is in any way a fair, democratic or representative institution.

As for more popular level democracy within the UN, that seems to me an idea doomed to failure. Within democracies we generally take the view that it is improper for a majority to use its power to curb the rights of an individual or a minority.

How can the votes, or the weighted votes, of a majority of nations, or representing a majority of people on the planet, suddenly decide that the people of East Timor will, or will not, be sovereign. Or the people of South Sudan? Or Palestine? The hallmark of newly independent states is that they have gained their recognition from the precursor state, either through negotiation or through armed conflict. Similarly, the annexation of states requires either the acquiescence or the armed suppression of the state to be annexed. No amount of international recognition will change the situation on the ground.

This is, at the end of the day, a hollow, hypocritical gesture by nations who are content to stick it to Israel, but lack the willingness to do the same to China.