14 march, 2009
It was recently revealed that our Governor-General, our Queen’s representatives down here, Quentin Bryce, is about to take a controversial 18 days 9 African counties trip, apparently canvassing for Australia seat on the United Nation Security Council (UNSC)
The trip is controversial because, contrary to conventions, our G-G agreed to participate in partisan politics, but this is to be expected when a socialist megalomaniac PM like Kevin 747 appoints a fellow Queenslander, socialist activist republican to represent the queen.
Leaving the constitutional question of the trip aside, it seems that our illustrious PM’s sudden urge to for substantial engagement with Africa has nothing to do with Kumbaya but to pander to the Africans, canvassing their support for Australia’s (non-permanent) seat on the UN Security Council in the 2012 General Assembly vote for 2013/14 tenure.
Whilst there is nothing wrong or unusual about Australia seeking a UNSC seat per se, Australian interests, or world peace, does not appear to be the motive of Kevin747, not in my opinion anyhow.
As an avid Kev watcher, I cannot escape the feeling that this is all done to satisfy Kevin’s control freakishness, megalomaniac tendencies and a further excuses to dance on world stages. I would not be surprised if behind it all is the background of Kev eventual assault on the job of Secretary General when Kev is “elder statesman” former PM and Ban Ki Moon had enough.
My main concern is that, if I am judging the situation correctly, Australia’s interests are about to be trampled on for a personal agenda. Oh, don’t tell me, Kevin does not do it for himself, it is all for Australia. Bull dust!
The UN is the most corrupt organisation in the world, there no revere can come to Australia from associating with such shady body (in it current structure) that is anything but what its founders intended.
How does it works?
The Security Council
The Security Council (UNSC) is the only UN body with “teeth”; unlike the General Assembly, it has the powers to enforce its resolutions (if it wishes) by mastering peace keeping forces, apply sanctions, embargoes or even engage in a military campaign as it did in the Korea War and the Gulf War I.
The UNSC also vets and recommend admission of new member states to the UN for approval (or not) by the General Assembly (GA).
It also select the new Secretary General for member states approval by a vote in the Assembly (or not).
The UNSC is the “executive branch” of the UN, similar to a Board Of Directors (except the veto powers) whilst the general Assembly is akin to the shareholders of a company
The UNSC comprises of fifteen members, fives permanent, perms in UN jargon and ten rotating members, non-perms.
The Five perms are United State, Untied Kingdom, France, Russia and China, each has a veto power on any UNSC resolution.
Every year five of the ten non-perms are voted for a two years tenure, similar to the half senate elections. Their composition is based on the following key:
Africa: 3; Latin America & The Caribbeans: 2; Eastern Europe: 1; Asia: 2; Western Europe & Others: 2.
In addition, there must always be at least one Arab member that comes off either from the Asian or the African allocation.
The “others” in the Western Europe group include Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel.
Israel is the 57th state member of the UN, in order of joining. Israel Was accepted as a UN member state on 11 May, 1949. It preceded countries such as Austria, Finland, Italy, Portugal Spain and the vast majority of Africa (the exception are Egypt, Ethiopia and South Africa).
Because of Arab opposition, Israel was not accepted as part of the Asian bloc, it became an “untouchable” bloc of itself, a bloc that is not entitled to a seat on the security council.
In 2000 Israel was accepted “temporarily” to the Western Europe & Others bloc ON THE CONDITION that it would not seek a seat on security council, still untouchable.
There you have it, whilst the Arab countries always guaranteed a seat on the Security Council, Israel is “guaranteed” never to have one. What about cultural diversity, social inclusion and other PC spins? Heh?
The United State has requested Israel not to “rock the boat” on the issue of seat on the UNSC in exchange for a US “diplomatic umbrella”. This is the real source for the USA support of Israel in the UN, rather than “strong Jewish lobby” although there is little doubt that USA support for Israel needs no special agreements.
The purpose of these facts are not to present Israel as a victim, just to demonstrate one of many hypocrisies that rule the UN.
To gain a seat on the Security Council, Australia must get the two third of the votes in the General Assembly (GA) or 128 vote out of total 192 members. The fact that Finland and Luxemburg have also put their candidacy forward makes it a three horses race.
The charade has commenced, now let us turn to the working of GA.
The General Assembly
The General Assembly (GA) is the forum of All 192 members states of the UN, practically all the countries in world, except Taiwan and the Vatican.
The voting in the GA is one state one vote, thus the vote of the USA or Russia is equal to the votes of, say, Maldives or Andorra.
Not so when it comes to funding the UN. The UN is funded by its members according to their relative capacity to pay (measure by the respective Gross National Income). The top six of the contributors to the UN provide about 64% of its budget (2006 figures) whilst the last third of members provide less then one thousandth of it (0.1%).
Russia is the only UNSC perm that does not make the first fifteen contributors list, nor would you find any OPEC member in that list.
The GA meet yearly from September to December but may be called for extraordinary seatings. About two third of members, also known as known as G77 (although they are nowadays about 130 in number) or the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) practically control the stage on the assembly when they vote en bloc which is most times.
NAM was founded during the Cold War days by India’s Nehru and Yugoslavia’s Tito as supposedly a bloc of counties that are not aligned with the West or with the USSR. These countries were also known as the third world, developing countries etc. Today, counting observers status too, the bloc includes all the countries in Africa, all the countries of Asia (except Japan, South Korea, Turkey and Israel) and all the countries of Latin America and the Caribbeans (except Argentina).
Like all UN euphemisms, the tern non-aligned is nothing but a bad joke. The phrase suppose to denote a forging policy independent from the USA and Russia; Really? How foreign policy independent is NATO member such as non-aligned Poland? The same question can be asked of former USSR states such as Uzbekistan or Kyrgyzstan who enjoy the Russian bear hug?
Be that as it may, you now realise that if you want a resolution passed in the UN you have Buckley’s chance of getting it unless you have the 113 votes of Non-Aligned, or about 130 votes if you include “observers” (and hangers on) which is just over two third of the UN vote that will guarantee control on the assembly.
But wait, it is getting even better, 54 members of the non-aligned bloc also belong to the 57 states strong Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) meaning that just about half of the so-called non-aligned countries are the Muslim countries; put it in other words, as there is no veto powers in the GA, the UN General Assembly is in fact controlled by the Muslim world!!!
Now, you don’t really need to be a rocket scientists to see the reasons for the constant obsession of the UN and its institutions with constant condemnations of Israel. Do you really believe that had Mamma Teresa headed the Israeli government the relations of Israel with the UN would have been any better? if you do I have some excellent investment opportunity for you in one of Bernard Madoff’s secured investment funs.
Although the resolutions of the GA are not binding, they are often used as excuses to limit our liberties for the greater good of the planet … or such like similar crap. How many such UN resolutions have been used in such a manner? Let’s look at some examples:
On 6 December, 1973 (in a middle of oil embargo against the West by OPEC, mind you) the UN passed Resolution 307, the LIMA DECLARATION ON INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND CO-OPERATION, also known as the Lima Declaration in short, that mandated the largest ever transfer of wealth from of the developed word to the Third World. e.g:
25. [The signatories declares that They] resolve to ensure the speedy and effective implementation of the principles of industrialisation laid down in the International Development Strategy for the 197Os which is being adapted to the Programme of Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order;
27. That countries, particularly developed countries, should undertake an objective and critical examination of their present policies and make appropriate changes in such policies so as to facilitate the expansion and diversification of imports from developing countries and thereby make possible international economic relations on a rational, just and equitable basis;
[Emphasis and highlights provided]
(Hey, who needs conspiracy theories?)
Let us look at another issue, the Environment. The REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT, also known as the Rio Declaration, The forerunner to the Kyoto Protocol. Again, the UN General Kumbaya agree that we must save the planet but … wait … not if it hurts some poor none-aligned.
Principle 6 of the declaration makes sure that saving the planet is a NIMBY (Not In My back yard) affair.
The special situation and needs of developing countries, particularly the least developed and those most environmentally vulnerable, shall be given special priority. International actions in the field of environment and development should also address the interests and needs of all countries.
The futility of global warming aside, the same principle is used by China and India to excuse themselves from taking action on global warming, not because it is a the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on human kind but because the proportionality doctrine that says that it is now their “turn” to emit carbon dioxide.
Perhaps we can also agree that all those nations who missed out on slavery be allowed to introduce it provided it is proportionate to previous slavery, how about it? It is their turn!
And so the Third Word gets away exempting itself from a whole host of UN resolutions due to cultural sensitivities, We, in the west, are prevented from discipline our kids by the UN Convention On The Right Of The Child, whilst third world countries may continue to practice child slavery and deny education to Muslim girls having regard to economic, social and cultural rights as permitted by Article 4 (and elsewhere) in the convention.
Women may be bitten and honour-killed in conformity with cultural sensitivities simply because the Organisation of Islamic Conference control the Third World voting bloc in the General Assembly, the same applies to other human rights that are too culturally sensitive to be adopted in Muslim countries.
The whole travesty they call human rights, in the context of the UN, is an issue by itself, but you can do no more than shaking your head in disbelief observing countries such as Libya, Sudan, Iran and other with abhorrent human rights records leading the Untied Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) reprimanding western democracies on the subject.
But don’t think that if you don’t like what you see you have a right to criticise it, you don’t! Take a look at the UN Resolution 62/154 Combating Defamation Of Religions, which has been dubbed as Anti-Islamophobia Resolution. It calls for countries to take measure to stop criticism of Islam.
But I guess that Muslim have a cultural sensitivity that allow them to call Jews and Christians apes and swine.
The UN has ceased to fulfilled its intended functions sometimes in the 1960′s. It has become a tools to drag humanity back to the seven century, limit our sovereignty and rid us of our liberties.
Too often we see narrow and radical self interests within our countries use the UN to subterfuge the democratic process and liberties as if the UN is some sort of a supreme benevolent umpire (*gulp*).
Next time that you see a UN resolution, just before you get all wet an worm on the inside, remember Who the hell is actually running this charade we call the United Nation.© Copyright Jacob Klamer 2009