Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Agamemnon
It seems to me that you understand the role of the Moderator, but because this moderator in particular doesn't have absolute power, the role of Moderator is useless and should be removed? How does that improve the situation? I'd rather have a Moderator with limited effectiveness than none at all.
|
That isn't what I'm talking about. It's not a UN or nothing. It's a UN or improvement on UN stance that I have.
As long as there is tremendous resistance to criticizing the UN, there can be no improvements.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Agamemnon
Sure. And I'm 100% on board with you. I would love nothing more than the UNSC P5 states to unify and begin giving the UNSC teeth, which, as you said, they do have the power to do. I just put the responsibility on these P5 states, specifically, rather than saying the forum in which they operate is obviously the reason global security isn't effective. Its not like the P5 states want to get things done but the UN is standing in the way. The UN would love nothing more than realistic missions with realistic mandates. If the P5 choose not to give them this, there's nothing they can do. Responsibility rests with the P5, not with the bureaucratic structure of the UN.
|
The UN needs a leader to bring these P5 states together. They obviously aren't going to do it themselves. The UN needs to improve to get its goals (or our goals for it) to be achieved. Throwing your hands up and saying "I'm not getting any cooperation, oh well" should not be an option.
Would that leader succeed 100% of the time? Of course not. That said, it's not even being seriously attempted right now.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Agamemnon
Fair enough. Though, more useful than saying nothing at all. Thats sort of the jist of my point; if the UN isn't going to do it, or you think they're incapable of it, who is supposed to step in and fill that role more competently?
Obviously the P5 states believe there is a reason to pass resolutions without enforcement options.
|
They're passing resolutions without enforcement options because nobody is making them decide on one. They're diplomats, after-all, usually notorious peace-niks. Anything to avoid a physical conflict. It works sometimes, but not always.
I don't see it as the UN being incapable of doing it. I see it as the UN being unwilling to do it. Very different.