Why The UN Can’t Be Trusted

In the wake of September 11, the United Nations asked each of its members to combat terrorisms in their borders by freezing accounts and preventing terror cells from operating in their country. This resolution was designed to prevent groups like al-Qaeda from being able to simply shift their operations from country to country to avoid losing funding.

108 of the 191 countries in the UN have failed to comply with these directives.

“When considered against the fact, there is a serious question as to the extent to which states are looking to the U.N. resolution in this regard,” the committee said.

Only 371 individuals and entities associated with the terrorist network have been included on a master list, even though some 4,000 Al Qaeda operatives in 102 countries have been arrested, the committee lamented.

Of 272 people on the list, only a few have been accounted for, the committee reported.

And while many funds have been located and frozen, the committee said, many countries have been reluctant to freeze tangible assets such as businesses or property.

And what will the results of this non-compliance be?

Absolutely nothing. The UN has no power to enforce its own directives, and would hardly be willing to do so in this case even if it did.

This is why the United Nations is not, nor will it be, and effective agency to combat terrorism. When the best you can do is beg terror-sponsoring states to freeze assets, you can’t expect to be effective against groups like al-Qaeda. Those who think that the UN will somehow be more effective than the US in fighting the war on terror are living in a transnational progressive’s dream world.

One thought on “Why The UN Can’t Be Trusted

  1. I’ve never heard a single person suggest that the UN will be more effective in fighting the war on terror. What I hear, and what I believe, is that the UN will be more effective in administering a postwar Iraq–surely you understand the enormity of the difference. I wouldn’t have trusted the UN to rout the Taliban in a matter of weeks, nor would I have expected NATO’s integrated military to perform as well as the US Armed Forces did relatively solo. But I for one am glad to have NATO involvement in the occupation and administration of Afghanistan, and I’d rather an international force garrison Iraq until it manages to complete its transition to anocracy or democracy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.