
|  |  | Editorials | Opinions  
What is the Future of the UN? (Part Two)
Guillermo Ramón Adames y Suari - PVNN January 03, 2010

 |  | In today's 6 billion world population there is not a world class leader. |  |  |  | Something has to be done with today's value system: When you had a kid who made a mess at home and you as a loving father spanked him, everything went to normal afterwards. Today you do that and you go to jail. How "far" is "far"? Anything you do today in the UN context follows the very same pattern. Countries have entangled the system to a point that is no longer operational.
 The UN has two options:
 1. Definitely disappear as it can no longer operate in an undefined frame of operation
 2. Give a step backwards and become strict ignoring some rights.
 The point in case would be to indicate: "The UN will furnish this type of assistance under this and these conditions only. Whichever other reasons shall not come into place".
 I do not see any of these two options happening.
 First: Economics. Just imagine the UN-NY building for sale and the US to give up those billions of dollars for which the US does not move a finger and get injected in the US economy: What about Switzerland? Imagine the land in the middle of Geneva which hosts the UN family organization for sale. Tenths of UN or sister organizations pouring money into the Swiss Federation. Then there is Austria, Paris, GB and so many other organizations generating income to countries. Those countries won't let go. And what is most important, we have not talked of human or international needs. Purely money. Or shall we be diplomatic and call it "economics".
 Second: From the previous paragraph: Replace the UN by what? Many staff won't let go either. Alternatively there is a need for a discussion platform.
 Third: The world has no leaders. Some of the leaders who move masses over time were: A. Lincoln, V. Lenin, Mao, Nelson Mandela. Sadly the ones who brought us in one way or other to WWII and beyond: A. Hitler, B. Mussolini, J. Stalin, F. Franco and Emperor Hiro Hito some African Dictators and later Pol Pot. Some others got us out of the problems like Ch. de Gaulle, W. Churchill, D. Eisenhower. Other sort: JFK and Martin Luther King and N. Mandela. Who please tell me who could have the personality to dear challenge the "UN system"?
 In today's 6 billion world population there is not a world class leader. Surely, there are some good people amongst our various presidents but one who would challenge the course of humanity… there is none. There is none to suggest a drastic modification to world politics. After having the pleasure of talking to Nelson Mandela in Paris, I had the hope that somebody like him would bring his ideals to the UN. To his saying, South Africa was his goal and he devoted his life to it, not to the rest of the world. N. Mandela has been the only person I have heard saying: "My life for an ideal" and he meant with his heart and soul every single letter of any single word he said. And he did it. Have you heard any of today's world leaders saying half of that? Don't look for them: Today, there is none and it is dangerous: That lack of strong leadership (or joint leadership) gave course to WWII.
 Now: Do you understand why Copenhagen did not come to any solution? Do you understand that interests so very entangled will never reach to any decision of any kind? The UN's hands are tight by its own value system.
 What will surely happen is that countries which pay will get tired of countries that don't pay and in turn stop paying. Then, big economic powers will keep the name and rearrange the UN services to their own benefit and set the rules for themselves. Idealism under which the UN was founded is over. Today it is purely economics: investment/benefit and the people and the nations and the climate and the resources and the water will simply not count at all.

 Guillermo Ramón Adames y Suari is a former electoral officer of the United Nations Organization. Contact him at gui.voting(at)gmail.com |

 |
|  |