permanent organizations and UN authority

Submitted by myth (Germany), Feb 9, 2012 at 12:56

Conflicts ask leadership when lives are at stake. Can one inistitutionalize leadership? I am afraid not. Bureaucracy inistitutionalizes all by itself. That is why I would not favour "an organization of democratically-elected governments" that is permanent. The EU is such an organization. In the early 90ies the EU sat undecided when confronted with the war in Yugoslavia. No light at the end of the tunnel there. I believe in ad-hoc-coalitions based on initiative. To me there is a clear choice to ground a coalition either in contracts or mutual trust.

The UN today has authority in the eyes of the press, the western public likes it too. Yet no party in a conflict would accept UN authority to determine the winner and the loser of that conflict.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".