UNO is an anachronism, and does not serve any more the purpose for which it was established.
United Nations Organisation “had been “ a symbol of equality and Unity of Nations of the World. But to-day the UN does not symbolise either the Unity or the equality of Nations. The developed countries dominate the World Forum and the Chief Executive the Secretary General of the UNO is only a “ puppet “ of the rich Nations, who are determined to use the UNO for their political strategy to dominate the world.
The United Nations representing the Nations of the World is nominally , the Forum to settle conflicts, encouraging dialogue between Nations avoiding armed confrontation. But despite the UNO, America declared war against Iraq, hanged in “public” its Head of State and continues a war allegedly to eliminate the Al Qaeda terrorists.
The powerful Nations have no concern for the UN and aggresses and takes covert action of all sorts against developing Nations, who are nevertheless, members of the UNO with equal rights. Despite the UNO- the forum of world Nations, the developed Nations other than being Members of the UN, run parallel Administrative Organs to control and take punitive actions against developing Nations by way of withdrawal of special trade concessions and imposing trade embargos, making reports discrediting governments on hearsay evidence to US Congress Committees.
Thus the rich and developed countries have reduced the UNO to a banal talk shop, a biannual meeting place to make resounding speeches of hope and glory by World Leaders. UNO is no more what it was meant to be when its founding fathers with all sincerity launched it with the hope of make it a forum for Nations to debate and find solutions to make the world a safe and peaceful place for the humanity.
The UNO was recognised by all Nations as an Organisation of consultation for settlement of conflicts avoiding armed confrontation. America should not have gone to war in Iraq without the approval of the UN Security Council. If the UNO was meant to stop conflicts between Nations, the US State Department should not be taking unilateral action to control nuclear proliferation. It should been referred to the UNO, as a decision making body for world affairs to establish peace and harmony among the Nations of the World, to take up the matter directly with errant nations and to be debated in its respective Committees.
If UNO is the recognised Organisation of its Member States, a Forum for Nations to come together and decide collectively before any action is taken by one Member State against another, America as a Member State of the UNO should not threaten Iran or North Korea with consequence of war if they continue with their nuclear programmes.
That issue should be debated even before a meeting of the Security Council is called to decide punitive action against Iran or North Korea for continuing its nuclear programme.
But as it is UNO is skipped over by America to take unilateral decisions against a Member State. President Obama’s America while denouncing the Bush Administration for going to war with Iraq, pursues the same hackneyed old dangerous methods of the Bush Administration, to stop Iran from continuing its nuclear programme.
If USA, Russia, France, China, India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, why should America go all out to stop Iran developing a nuclear weapons in its turn. What is the difference between Iran and other Nations who have developed nuclear weapons ?
It is time for America and its European allies to decide whether they want the UNO to continue for the purpose for which it was established or leave it to take their own unilateral decision against member states and suffer the consequences.
No Government would subjugate their sovereignty without making an attempt to defend itself. A time may come when all those countries that do not toe the American and European line may unite to rise against them. In such an event even a nuclear warfare cannot be ruled out.
The election of the Heads of UNO, and its sister Organisations such as UNESCO are a mockery of democratic principles. It is the rich countries who get a “puppet” candidate appointed to the Organisation, by political manoeuvres to win over smaller member state to vote for the “puppet” selected by them. Therefore, the more qualified and suitable candidates put forward by poorer countries are voted out in the first few round of voting.
The UNO has set up its Commission of human rights, and the present High Commissioner does not take any objective and independent decisions. We have seen it happening recently in Geneva, where the UN HCHR, was working hand in hand with the powerful Member States of the West who were making an all out effort to discredit the government of Sri Lanka and accuse its armed forces for war crimes, simply because it eliminated the ruthless group of terrorists, with whom they Western Countries were conniving to break up Sri Lanka.
When the High Commissioner found that the aims of the anti-Sri Lanka Western Member States were foiled, Navi Pillai the UNHigh Commissioner for Human Rights went all out to call for another vote to over rule the decision of the Human Rights Council.
The UNO should be an organisation of Nations where they help each other, and take concerted decisions to help and develop the poorer nations, and settle conflicts . The UNO looses its right to exist as an Organisation of the Nations of the World if the “ junior official “ of the Organisation are allowed to make individual statements against a member State.
Any criticism of a member state should normally be made to the UNO and placed before a special General Assembly or a Committee of the Organisation called to debate on the matter to settle it, and any statements pertaining to the subject of criticism should be issued by the Secretary General.
The Security Council should be the ultimate resort for any serious decision to be taken against a member state.
UNO cannot serve any useful purpose as long as the powerful Member States have their own Agenda. As it is, they are there to use the UNO to serve their own political ends. The powerful nations are not interested in the welfare and development of the smaller member states seeking the help of the rich to rise out of their poverty or underdevelopment, but they are interested in setting up their political strategies to maintain their political leadership among Nations.
We have seen it happening in Chile, where America used CIA operations to organise manifestations and a military coup against its first Democratically elected President Salvador Allende, and set up the Western “puppet” Augusto Pinochet the Military Commander , as the President of Chile.
America was determined to oust Allende, whom they called a pro Soviet Communist. His close friendship with the Cuban leader Fidel Castro did not please them either. It is said that the CIA spent over one million Dollars for the Anti Allende propaganda Campaign, and to aid his opponents.
(In the light of this, can we accept that Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu and Jehan Perera went to meet O’Blake at the American State Department for nothing ?)
We saw unilateral action taken by America against Cuba in 1961 with the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion. Another one of the CIA operations. It tried to use these same tactics again in Tiamenan in China, but failed. All that, while the UNO which had been set up to settle conflicts between Nations stood helplessly inactive.
America was out to rid the developing Nations with their forward looking progressive National leaders. as far back as in 1950s. Jacobo Arbenz President of Guatamala, and Mossadegh the Prime Linister of Iran were ousted by CIA Operations.
The powerful Nations are again back on their “war path” against developing Nations.
All the while these nefarious activities of American CIA were going on, UNO remained a silent observer ?
UNO has become an Organisation of inaction, the Secretary General merely parroting the words of the powerful nations. The rich Member States disregarding the UNO continue to create chaos in smaller Member States. UNO wakes up only when the powerful Nations accuses a developing Nation, not to defend it, but to join with the powerful nations to accuse the developing nation in its turn.
Sri Lanka is a case study of the powerful states moves to break up developing countries and use them for their political end. Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean, is a country with a high percentage of literacy and a skilful population. It has all the potentials to rise above its underdevelopment to become a self sufficient Nation. It would be able to stand proudly along with the Nations of the rest of the world despite its “size”, and contribute for the peace and development of the World.
Unfortunately, to-day the Western Powers have become dangerous “ terrorists” against the developing countries. In Sri Lanka while the terrorists openly declared their intention to break up the country to set up an Eelam State, the Western Nations carry out undercover operations for the same purpose.
Sri Lanka’s development was hampered by a group of terrorists that had been trained by the RAW of the Indian Government and sent to Sri Lanka in the early 1980s. This band of terrorists continued a campaign of terror assassinating all their opponents, and government officials. They were financially assisted by a large expatriate Tamil community . With the funds provided by the expatriate Tamils the terrorists built a strong armed force.
They were helped by a former Prime Minister of Sri Lanka with a CFA which enabled them to strengthen their military capabilities. These terrorists were utilised by an interested group of Western Countries such as the USA, UK, France, Germany, and Canada, with Norway as their “anchor man” to be in secret contact with the terrorists.
Their object was to use the LTTE terrorists to break up Sri Lanka and use its strategic position for their political leadership, and use it as a barrier against China and Russia. With that objective they manoeuvred from the beginning to discourage the military operations against the terrorists by the Sri Lanka Government, insisting that the government should negotiate for a political settlement.
The terrorists became more ruthless massacring innocent people and assassinating politicians . They were finally banned as a terrorist organisation in 33 countries around the world. Despite the terrorists of Sri Lanka being band , the USA and the European Countries, secretly assisted the terrorists to continue terrorism, to arrive at their object of breaking up Sri Lanka following their new policy of Balkanisation as another form of colonization to keep the poor nations poor, and for the powerful nations to lead the world in the guise of benefactors of developing nations.
However, the Sri Lanka Armed Forces determined to end terrorism in Sri Lanka, which had hampered its development for thirty years, conducted a systematic, disciplined, humane military operations against the terrorists and eliminated terrorism completely by killing the terrorist leadership in a final military operation on the 19th May,2009.
For the first time a small nation- that is Sri Lanka, vanquished terrorism, while the powerful Nations are still embroiled in their attempt to eliminate terrorism they have vowed to do. But their war against Talibans and Al Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan continues without an end in sight.
This great feat of the Sri Lanka Armed Forces against terrorism should have been applauded and Sri Lanka Government and its Armed Forces felicitated by all peace loving Nations of the World, and specially by those intelligent powerful Nations.
But what happened is the opposite. The International Community have changed rolls and treat the Government of Sri Lanka and its armed Forces the terrorists, and the terrorists and their sympathisers the innocent victims of the Governments military operations against terrorism.
This hypocrisy of the West the USA, UK, France, Norway and the rest will remain the most heinous political crime against a developing Nation. On the 11 September, 2001, the world changed. The West took arms against terrorism vowing to fight terrorism any where it exists. But paradoxically on the 19 May, 2009 the same West, changed again vowing this time to take Sri Lanka Armed Forces that successfully eliminated ruthless terrorism from its soil, to a tribunal accused of war crimes !!!
UNO being what it is, we understand why the President Mahinda Rajapakse preferred to send his Prime Minister to the UNGeneral Assembly.
Even then the Secretary General Ban Ki Moon meeting the Prime Minister had “ underlined the importance of winning the trust and confidence of the population in the North, especially those in the IDP camps, as failure to do so could undermine the prospects for reconciliation”. These are the words of Robert O’Blake, which Ban Ki Moon had shamelessly repeated.
.jpg)
