ESLaPorte
2005-02-09 14:51:44 UTC
Yes the world is in need of a policeman!
by ESLaPorte
http://www.pronato.com/commentary/index.htm
Wed, Feb 09 2005
Yes, the world needs a policeman. What strikes me about the advocates of
absolute realists is that they view the world as a place of chaos and
anarchy, where the leaders of even close allies cannot be trusted. So, why
is a realist, unilateralist like Dr. Rice stating that our NATO is not the
world policeman?
No, NATO is not the world policeman, but nor should the service of our
Alliance be ruled out, including in the Sudan and the rest of Africa.
What other organization is capable of stopping the violence and ethnic
cleansing in Darfur ?
Not the UN!!!
Now, the United Nations has had a nice reputation for aid programs and the
European Union is a nice economic union, but only NATO can stop mass murder
and tyrannical violence. The Europeans do not have the security capabilities
of NATO, nor do Europeans have the will to stop the violence in Africa, even
though the refugees that are created make up a sizeable chuck of those
"illegally" immigrating to Europe. Also, how many Eastern European nations
would trust their security to the Union?! How much security from threats can
the United Nations provide?!
First of all, NATO itself was formed because of the ineptness of the United
Nations demonistrated by the North Atlantic democracies' failed attempts to
get needed global security measures through the UN Security Council. Back in
the 1940's the Soviet Union used its seat on the Council to block security
measures. The feeling of insecurity and the aggressive nature of communism
prompted North Atlantic democracies to go out on their own under Article 51
of the UN Charter.. The idea of regional organizations ringing the globe to
prevent aggression was a brainchild of Canadian diplomat, Lester Pearson.
The world policeman role needs to be a role that should be done by both NATO
and other regional organizations. NATO is currently the organization that is
capable of stopping the violence in Darfur, which resembles the ethnic
violence of Southeastern Europe of the 1990's. NATO could be used, as in
Iraq, as a core for democratic nations and others to join in stopping the
violence in Africa. If a NATO member does not want to risk troops and
treasure to help others - let them sit on the sidelines! There needs to be
several policeman of the world, realism teaches us this, and NATO should be
the chief of police, with out regional organizations pitching in. NATO was
also tasked to "arrest" indicted war criminals in Bosnia for the ICTY in the
Hague. So, the "policeman" role for NATO appears to have been good enough
for the violence and mass murder in the Balkans, but not anywhere else?
by ESLaPorte
http://www.pronato.com/commentary/index.htm
Wed, Feb 09 2005
Yes, the world needs a policeman. What strikes me about the advocates of
absolute realists is that they view the world as a place of chaos and
anarchy, where the leaders of even close allies cannot be trusted. So, why
is a realist, unilateralist like Dr. Rice stating that our NATO is not the
world policeman?
No, NATO is not the world policeman, but nor should the service of our
Alliance be ruled out, including in the Sudan and the rest of Africa.
What other organization is capable of stopping the violence and ethnic
cleansing in Darfur ?
Not the UN!!!
Now, the United Nations has had a nice reputation for aid programs and the
European Union is a nice economic union, but only NATO can stop mass murder
and tyrannical violence. The Europeans do not have the security capabilities
of NATO, nor do Europeans have the will to stop the violence in Africa, even
though the refugees that are created make up a sizeable chuck of those
"illegally" immigrating to Europe. Also, how many Eastern European nations
would trust their security to the Union?! How much security from threats can
the United Nations provide?!
First of all, NATO itself was formed because of the ineptness of the United
Nations demonistrated by the North Atlantic democracies' failed attempts to
get needed global security measures through the UN Security Council. Back in
the 1940's the Soviet Union used its seat on the Council to block security
measures. The feeling of insecurity and the aggressive nature of communism
prompted North Atlantic democracies to go out on their own under Article 51
of the UN Charter.. The idea of regional organizations ringing the globe to
prevent aggression was a brainchild of Canadian diplomat, Lester Pearson.
The world policeman role needs to be a role that should be done by both NATO
and other regional organizations. NATO is currently the organization that is
capable of stopping the violence in Darfur, which resembles the ethnic
violence of Southeastern Europe of the 1990's. NATO could be used, as in
Iraq, as a core for democratic nations and others to join in stopping the
violence in Africa. If a NATO member does not want to risk troops and
treasure to help others - let them sit on the sidelines! There needs to be
several policeman of the world, realism teaches us this, and NATO should be
the chief of police, with out regional organizations pitching in. NATO was
also tasked to "arrest" indicted war criminals in Bosnia for the ICTY in the
Hague. So, the "policeman" role for NATO appears to have been good enough
for the violence and mass murder in the Balkans, but not anywhere else?