Baron von Lotsov

I had a look at the constitution and it says something about all international organisations. The UN has to be one of the big ones, deciding on things like war (unbelievable when one considers what the word war actually means).

I have had a look into what they do behind the scenes and much like the EU the more you examine it the viler the thing you are examining appears to be. The UKIP have done a grand job on the EU in my opinion but the UN is still conducting business, still completely corrupt and unaccountable and calls indoctrination 'helping to educate the third world'.

So what does the UKIP think of it and more to the point would it not be a good idea to campaign on the general principle that all these organisations of the international NGO type are essentially the same, they all scratch each others backs, they deal in money by the billion and no one votes for them. To mention what is wrong with the UN is going to take a substantial amount of typing, it's one of those things where it is difficult to know where to start.

harryaldridge

If the proposals in our Internation Trade & Development policy paper are to be adopted then then UKIP's position is that the UN, as should all international organisations, shoule be simply a platform for independent nation states to be treated as equals to discuss issues of mutual importance. No international organisation should compel member nations to act in a certain way or bind themselves in international law, but should help facilitate discussions ad respect the national sovereingty of nations.

__________________
http://vindicovindico.blogspot.com

Phil Sheldon

The UN is one of several international platforms that is used to apply pressure on on other nations. What about Zimbabwe? I think the UN could and should do a lot more to expose Mugabe's thuggish war on his citizens and certainly the West should stop pussyfooting about and do a lot more to expose his rape of his treasury and nation.

Discussions don't always work, laudable as their aims are. The UN 'Discussed' Iraq/Iran/Afgahnistan/Cuba/Libya et al and what happened? We read and hear the results of those discussions every day.
The UN is a toothless tiger and the influence of the African Union seems to be out of proportion to both the size of their respective countries and financial commitment to the UN.

http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/aumonitor/27913

I hope and wish that NF will apply as much energy to reforming the UN as he does to Independence from Europe.

Aardvark

Harry, where does the paper leave OSCE/ODIHR? Although there is no compulsion there is a lot of assistance and advice given to struggling nations. The OSCE actually works and achieves a lot (IMHO having worked for them on 12 occasions). It is very cheap by international standards, yet helps establish working electoral systems, combats people trafficking and sorts out the messes left by wars and internal troubles. NATO is another good organisation where people cooperate and work together (I worked as part of NATO for 17.5 years).

Neither NATO or OSCE are talking shps, but involve real hands on work.

__________________
When in Woking do as the Wokes do.

"I do not wish to form my opinions by thoughtlessly quoting others; I wish others to support their opinions by sensibly quoting me." Paul Wesson (Aardvark) 13th April 2008

kernow

I don't know enough about the UN other than it is a toothless Tiger to comment farther!

harryaldridge

I don't know about the OSCE/ODIHR specifically - the OSCE seems security focussed. However, so long as it is an organisation which enables nations to work together on issues, and does not form any kind of supranational institution then it is absolutely fine.

__________________
http://vindicovindico.blogspot.com

Baron von Lotsov

Right I agree with that. It is consistent with the general principle that we as a country make our own decisions on what we do. The point though is that if this power were removed from the UN then it would be as relevant as if all power were removed/reclaimed from the EU. Without power these organisations would have to listen to people and their only source of power would be people supporting them, much like a charity does.

But the UN's goal is not to be king of do-gooders, it is playing the power grabbing game much like the EU is. I think it is very much a similar kind of beast. It's also prejudiced and I think one reason why it is more of an issue in America is that it has been working against them, so it's a bit like the EU to us is like the UN is to America. However nothing is guaranteed to remain the same, an organisation only accountable to itself is like a loose cannon.