Has the UN been good at nation-building and maintaining peace & stability?

We have debated this point elsewhere. Arafat is now phenomenally wealthy, while the Palestinian people are dirt poor. I think it’s clear that he has stolen a great deal of the money donated by the UN and the EU. If you want to provide cites that Arafat didn’t take any money, that’s fine with me. If you want to consider this to be an unproved hypothesis, be my guest.

Excuses, excuses, excuses. Maybe the UN has a good excuse for not having done well by the West Bank, but those excuses don’t help the poor Palestinian people.

If the UN took over post-war Iraq, they might have a good excuse for screwing that up, too. After all, they’d have to deal with all sorts of political problems, including France and Russia lobbying to get their old debts covered and to get oil concessions. However, the Iraqi people will be better off with actual success than with good excuses. I think Coalition leadership is more apt to succeed.

It’s not your fault that the report you found is unclear. Peacekeeping forces are allegedly responsible for “several” rapes, not “systematic” rape. Here is the report that that article is based on. Of course, rape is a crime, but it does not appear that the peacekeepers’ actions rise to the level of war crimes.

Are you saying that the peacekeeping efforts in Sierra Leone were a failure? (Cite?) They are widely credited with ending a very brutal war there. Unfortunately, soldiers from every country occasionally commit rapes, but a few bad incidents do not nullify the U.N.’ s accomplishments.

Actually, there is no way that the ICC would have jurisdiction, and the U.S. was largely responsible for setting up the Sierra Leone Special Court that will try some war criminals from that war. We should give the U.S. government some credit, though the Court is so underfunded that it is unlikely to do any good.

I assert that you are unaware of the number of attempts by the UN to do so compared to your cites, and about the background of said cites.

Inapplicable, since it does not deal with peace and stability in a country, but one specific city. Given that the nations on the Security Council held prime responsibility for this massacre, it is unsuitable for fingerpointing against the UN as a whole. The Security Council declared the area safe.

You are seriously mistaken here. The infrastructure WAS created, by the EU, but was subsequently destroyed by the IDF. As for the ‘thuggish tyrrany that stole UN money’, your ‘tyrant’ was actually elected in elections widely deemed fair -twice. As for terrorists building bombs and planning attacks, it is also the site of massive violations of the Geneva Convention with the support and encouragement of the US.

Again inapplicable, since it worked admirably until undermined by western powers, and since western powers violated the same ceasefire.

Except, of course, that the track record of said coalition forces is even worse than that of the UN, for whose handful of lacks of successes, which you tear out of context of the number of successes, they are chiefly responsible. It is really telling that you make the UN responsible for said coalition sabotaging its efforts.

Where was the coalition in East Timor? How much did the US care about Cambodia?

Sorry, man, but you’re really ridiculous in your attempts to sling mud at the UN. No one doubts that the UN failed in some cases, but your examples show pure and unfettered ignorance, and you reveal yourself to be an apologist for sabotage, treaty violations and massive abuse of human rights of the worst kind.

Methinks you are not quite up to date. The EU has taken over Macdeonian peacekeeping.

Oh they care, as I can attest from having lived there for a bit, they do care. Had a Greek Cyproit point a gun at me over the Green Line – highly unpleasant moment.

I might add in re the PA example, since it was the CIA and USG generally that backed the PA security forces and took on resp. for training, their failure is an obvious black mark against the US (ahem ‘coalition’) rebuilding a secure country. By december standards.

In re Arafat’s wealth (signif, but not phenomenal), december likes to imply it seems to have come post-peace accords. I hope he has substantive support. I do not expect it to be the case, I rather expect more inuendo.

As for december’s opportunistic and I will say clearly highly hypocritical concern for the poor folks in the Territories, one would think that the poverty should rather be attributed to the sovereign entity which controlled PA area external commercial relations. That would not be the UN, which had some development programs. That would be Israel. While Israel had legit reasons for many (not all but many) security measures, they have both pre-2000 and esp. post-2000 strangled Palestinian commerce.

Of course, that is december’s ridiculous standard is not really relevant, but if we’re going to play the game, let’s play a level playing field.

To repeat a reference in the originating Pit Thread:

By the way in regards to december’s characterization of UN peacekeeping capacity and the Bosnia debacle (in which as I recall people like december did not want to get involved at all at the time) I direct readers to this helpful resource center:

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/peacekpg/index.htm

THere is a wealth of both positive and negative info avail here, it should help for an informed discussion and not one of ad hoc assertions.

One estimate of Arafat’s wealth is that $1.3 Billion is a fraction of it. Other estimates are $10 Billion and $11 Billion. No doubt you’re very well-paid, Collounsbury, but those figures are more than just “significant” for the rest of us. :wink:

Note that the money donated by the US (and IIRC Japan) went via a UN agency.

One estimate by an Israel intel source. I discount based on that very fact.

I am more familiar with the lower $100-300 mill. range.

Some of the monies have gone through the UN, the CIA and related stuff certainly did not my dear little december, so please try again.

Someone once told me that “proof” of the U.N. being not only ineffective, but bad is Katanga.
What is Katanga?
What happened?

I cannot vouch for this site, but here’s one version.

The key to judging the reliabiity of the above … screed I think is the phrase “Moscow inspired terrorist.” Patrice Lumumba may not have been wonderful but “Moscow inspired terrorist” is mere ranting.

Now why the UN should get hte blame for a US-French-Belgian intervention under UN cover to overthrow someone they linked to “Moscow” is beyond me. It wasn’t, after all, the UN that selected Mobutu in the end.

Rule number one in responding to a stupid OP is “do not make a stupid response.” You have violated that rule, OliverH.

Kindly provide one example, except for Iraq, where the “coalition” sabotaged UN peace-keeping/nation-building efforts.

The “coalition” got/allowed the UN to do the job. Remember, the UN can do nothing without the permission/approval of the US and UK.

Yes, it does. However, december, sadly, did better than you. He mischaracterized actual events. You just made stuff up.

Sua

december, even by your standards…

Getting a proper count gets bogged down in technical details, but it’s not very much off to say that UNSCOM supervised or verified the destruction of 48 missiles, 20 transport or launch vehicles, 50 fixed launch sites, 70 bio/chem warheads, 160 conventional warheads. Oh, and about 40000 filled and unfilled chemical munitions of different types, 600 tons weaponized & bulk chemical weapons agents, 4000 tons of precursor chemicals and just under 1000 pieces of equipment deemed critical for the production of chemical weapons. Not counting the 12 unfilled chemical warheads and the Al Samoud missiles destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision in 2003.

All of the above is nasty shit, all of it is no more.

If this is a failure by your standards, I’d love to hear your assessment of the Coalition’s performance re WMD so far. Seeing as they’ve found and destroyed - well - diddly-squat, they’ve got a bit of catching up to do, wouldn’t you say ?

The UN failed to get the government of Iraq to stop their development of WMDs.
The Coalition succeeded in this endeavor.

“The UN failed to get the government of Iraq to stop their development of WMDs.” The Coalition succeeded in this endeavor.

My magic necklace has stopped pink elefants from appearing this whole day. (Always wanted to do a magic necklace post)

  • I posted the above under Shayna’s ID, but I am me, OK ?

Exactly what WMD production the coalition managed to stop remains to be seen, doesn’t it ?

Well see my dear december that is not at all clear as those pesky little boys - let us refer to them by the more accurate NBC designation (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) - have yet to show up in large amounts.

Let me reproduce this (from http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=179832&pagenumber=4):
Doubts grow over Iraq ‘smoking gun’ The Financial Times
2 May 2003

Quoted in extenso as this is subscription based:

The article continues to note the development of expectations management in light of apparently reduced confidence.

I find the first sentence amusing.

I may as well include this in re the Arafat accusations:

“Behind the myth” PHIL REEVES
The Independent - United Kingdom; Jun 26, 2002

Actually a much longer and more interesting article, but this serves to give context for december’s relentless smear campaign.

Oh rotted, I meant to preview: there should be a “[b’]” at hte start of that long bolded section. Forgot the code issue.

May as well also add that I am sure some NBC will show up, but as I have maintained, this was nothing but theater deterence weapons and not the bugaboo sold to the gullible.