Actually the UN can't. Your view of UN Peacekeepers is entirely inaccurate. People view this organization as a powerful body with a standing military force that can power project effectively any where in the World where it really can't. In order for UN Peacekeepers to be deployed in the first place there needs to be unanimous consensus by the Security Council (Of which the US is a permanent member). A UN Peacekeeping mission is then only as effective as the member states that participate in it. When I was in University, I met General Romeo Dallaire, the Commander of the ill fated UNAMIR (United Nations Assistance Mission For Rwanda). I remembered the talk he was giving, about the way his mission was ham strung by politics and bureaucracy. Forget about tanks and attack choppers. They barely had any soldiers, lacked all heavy weaponry (no armor, artillery, air support, etc) and had restrictive Rules of Engagement. Dallaire and his men were basically reduced to bystanders as 70% of the Tutsi population were slaughtered. The Dutch faced the very same thing years later in Bosnia where they were powerless to stop the massacre at Srebenicia. The situation was so bad that the Serbian forces actually took Dutch peacekeepers hostage and threatened to execute them if they didn't piss off.
NATO on the other hand is a completely different organization that pays absolutely no heed to the UN. The more substantial military interventions have mostly been NATO (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Gulf of Aden anti-piracy, etc).
The simple reality is the UN is an organization that only has as much power as the more powerful member states allow it. People view it as an oppressing sinister symbol of One World Government when the truth is far simpler......it's not. You talk about money and power. You're better off looking at multinational corporations like Nestle, Amazon, Google or JP Morgan Chase if that's the case.
You know what's more sinister? The concerted effort to defund and delegitimize International Organizations that (though often ineffective) provide a means for nations to avoid conflict and deescalate. I'm not the biggest fan of the UN in that I think it needs to be reformed but I truly believe it still has a vital part to play.
The UN was formed from the ravages of WW2 as an American led initiative. That the US enjoys a lot of the benefits it does today was due to the global order set up after the war. Institutions like the UN, World Bank, IMF, etc. were set up to further US interests. That the US is willing to toss all that out today and practice isolationism just breaks my heart. Who do you think will step in and fill that vacuum? Russia? China? You're willingly surrendering your place in the Sun and it makes no sense to me.
Or you know what? We can just scrap the whole thing and have all nations go their own way...have the UN go the way of the League of Nations and see how long it'll take before WW3 breaks out.
Whoa whoa, hold your horses mate! I never said we should just disband the U.N. and orgs like that. Also never said it's all the illuminatis doing, or one world govt. or whatever today's flavor is called.
Look, I come from a post communist country, my default stance on anything involving positions of power and money is that everyone is corrupt in some way, otherwise they wouldn't be there. Sadly I'm rarely wrong.
I don't know all the answer to why they do what they do, just like you don't. But I think it's not a bad idea to at least ask the questions, and try to see behind the curtain.
As for the WHO and thus the U.N., I just said they do have the power to sanction, and if those sanctions are broken they can project power. Whether it's up to a vote, or it's just someone sitting in a secret volcano lair that just needs to wave a finger at a henchman to make it happen is entirely irrelevant to this. The fact is that they do have the power, even if they mess it up cos sometimes they spend the money on paper clips instead of rifle clips. ("Mags" don't rhyme lol)
Also, try to explain to a politician or just some random guy in a village that this is just the shape of peaceful bureaucracy, shaped like a T-72 for no reason at all...
commons.m.wikimedia.org
You said it yourself, I'm like those ppl that believe the U.N. has power. This means that it's not just me who is uneducated in this matter, right?
The U.N. is believed to hold that power, which means they will be treated as such by at least some, even if they don't actually have it. This means they do have power and with power, money is usually not that far behind.
Btw, how are they supposed to prevent WW3 if they don't have the power in the first place? Lol
I agree that big corp.s are probably even worse, because corporations like Google and Facebook have the tech and know how as well as the money to play Dr.Evil. Let's not go into this cos it's a deep and very dark hole, if someone wants to see it for themselves, there's plenty leaks and such circling around going back many years... The way you can't make a single cent on YT if you dare mention the beer virus, yet the dying old media can and is pushed in your face all day, is a great example of this power. Whether it's a good or bad act in this case dosnt matter, the important fact is that they have that power over people's lives in a way that few truly understand.
If you read back what you just wrote, it all.makes sense though. An organization thats supposed to have power, not as powerful as they want to be, wants to gain back some respect by having their WHO arm thrown around and acting like they know everything, while begging for even more money. Too bad it backfired on them, turnes out they were late to the game, and now their funding was cut.
As for the perception on the ground about the WHO by the common people in my city:
Do I see masked ppl with WHO tags handing out tests and masks and shit on the streets? Nope. Than what the hell am I paying that tax for? Oh right, my local public transport company (which is a private company only on paper) is actually handing out free masks at every major stop with the occasional bottles of hand sanitizer, maybe I should spend the WHO tax on them instead!
It's entirely wrong, obviously. The WHO is not the red cross or something similar, but the concerne is legit. What good are they when bloated to such an extent that they need so much money, yet seemingly they don't do that great when there is an actual pandemic going around?
You said you are sad to see the US pulling away from these orgs. I do find it concerning that something like Russia would take it's place. I hope that doesn't happen, but I can certainly understand if the U.S. feels like it had enough of the squabbling children and wants to be alone for a bit to get itself together. With the EU doing their own act, screeching about more power, less sovereignty, forming their own army... It seems like these organizations formed ages ago are becoming less and less relevant.
Maybe the U.S. pulling back can lead to reforms and new orgs that are needed for the balance to remain intact. One can only hope.
TL, DCare:
Sorry to derail the thread, will be back on topic with my beer virus news next time!
